Re: C++: variable length arrays and operator new[]

[Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>]

* Gabriel Dos Reis:

>>> Is this intentional? ?The equivalent "new char[a][b]" is rejected (as
>>> required by the C++ standard).
>>
>> Is there any reason that g++ should reject your sample program?
>
> Yes: there is no obvious reason for gratuitous incompatibility in
> semantics.

That, and it requires full saturating multiplication support at
run-time if we want to fix PR19351 in the most straightforward way (by
passing size_t(-1) to the underlying allocator function in case of
overflow).