Patch to special_function_p
Kaveh R. Ghazi
Fri Mar 3 08:28:00 GMT 2000
> From: Jason Merrill <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> The C++ standard doesn't appear to provide any guarantees about
> whether or not operator new returns the pointer to a unique object; in
> practice the default operator new will do so (since it just calls
> malloc), but it can be overridden by the user to something that
> doesn't, and we can't optimize based on something that is probably,
> but not necessarily, true.
> Furthermore, operator new (size_t, void *) always returns its
> argument, which is almost certainly going to alias something else, so
> the blanket treatment of all op news as malloc-like is very wrong.
> Fixes g++.other/anon3.C when built with -O2.
> 2000-03-03 Jason Merrill <email@example.com>
> * calls.c (special_function_p): operator new may not be malloc-like.
Is even malloc safe? What if I do:
> foo = malloc(10);
> bar = malloc(10);
Isn't it possible that malloc returns the same address here?
(Or does the intervening call to free() block the aliasing
Kaveh R. Ghazi Engagement Manager / Project Services
firstname.lastname@example.org Qwest Internet Solutions
More information about the Gcc-patches