mt_allocator (rev 1.28) has static initilization problems?

[Paolo Carlini]

Paolo Carlini wrote:

> As you can see, __n = 245, therefore, the code looping on __tmp = 
> __tmp->_M_next
> should not be executed at all! The only plausible explanation is that
> _S_options._M_max_bytes is stuck at zero (as you reported) sigh!

Sorry, no, this is wrong of course: an _S_options._M_max_bytes stuck at 
zero would
actually force the immediate execution of ::operator delete(__p).

Still, __n = 245 and the loop on __tmp = __tmp->_M_next executed
doesn't make sense at all. An unrelated serious trouble, probably...

Paolo.