This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [PATCH] Add configure flag for operator new (std::nothrow)
- From: Pedro Alves <alves dot ped at gmail dot com>
- To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Daniel Gutson <daniel dot gutson at tallertechnologies dot com>
- Cc: Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>, Aurelio Remonda <aurelio dot remonda at tallertechnologies dot com>, libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:59:07 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add configure flag for operator new (std::nothrow)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1446554133-3090-1-git-send-email-aurelio dot remonda at tallertechnologies dot com> <56391843 dot 1070807 at gmail dot com> <CAF5HaEVeD4G1Mj8GwbpLyZ8V+GWNRAy1=5qbfVHgrZ=GpkbHbg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdQ_8cL8rqsX5u3NrNouf6E2_LtRPQ5F-V-rgTQ3FZTRug at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAF5HaEX5Ju0uXcFP4cLRvh_wWOBaqezbM6WdNUFp+CbzzKNjdg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdRf296VZwDaz8cS742RKEWid76un6-7ogxyzcTyWzj=rw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAF5HaEVx-Y9JJQ-nnUL3-kuwbCx0_rh+GOrxAFGFYBF2u6=iKw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdQYLqFLkMBJqe=4oSj20ago6F6rGXaDQ8umEEWsBy8k8g at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 11/06/2015 01:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 5 November 2015 at 23:31, Daniel Gutson
>> The issue is, as I understand it, to do the actual work of operator
>> new, i.e. allocate memory. It should force
>> us to copy most of the code of the original code of operator new,
>> which may change on new versions of the
>> STL, forcing us to keep updated.
>
> It can just call malloc, and the replacement operator delete can call free.
>
> That is very unlikely to need to change (which is corroborated by the
> fact that the default definitions in libsupc++ change very rarely).
Or perhaps libsupc++ could provide the default operator new under
a __default_operator_new alias or some such, so that the user-defined
replacement can fallback to calling it. Likewise for op delete.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves