This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?

From: "Andrew Pinski" <pinskia at gmail dot com>
To: "J.C. Pizarro" <jcpiza at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 12:56:27 -0700
Subject: Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?
References: <998d0e4a0704090938jd4c4f89h222e68f84b3b8d1c@mail.gmail.com> <de8d50360704090947m10e5c476l37462ac6d7eeb080@mail.gmail.com> <20070409172251.GC14474@synopsys.com> <998d0e4a0704091128y612e44dal16c32ee8bd1cd693@mail.gmail.com> <de8d50360704091142y703d338fo172236b07d585cad@mail.gmail.com> <998d0e4a0704091157u23e80cbbl4b530aeead3128e4@mail.gmail.com>

On 4/9/07, J.C. Pizarro <jcpiza@gmail.com> wrote:


Of course, i'm a novice because i like and i don't like the
GCC development's model.


Of course the user manual explains all what I have mentioned in my
previous email so it sounds like you like 95% of the other people who
don't read the manual (yes we can improve it but that problem is
different than the above one of not reading it period).

How will it be the code using __builtin_constant_p that i don't know?

Read the manual, it is listed there.

-- Pinski

References:
- Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?
  - From: J.C. Pizarro
- Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?
  - From: Joe Buck
- Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?
  - From: J.C. Pizarro
- Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: Integer overflow in operator new. Solved?
  - From: J.C. Pizarro

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]