public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "giovannibajo at libero dot it" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/14493] No std::bad_alloc::what() const
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 01:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040310011218.30425.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040308221042.14493.debian-gcc@lists.debian.org>
------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-03-10 01:12 -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> Honestly, is "std::bad_alloc" really that much more readable than
> "St9bad_alloc"? Especially compared to "bad allocation"?
Well, "St9bad_alloc" looks like memory corruption, unless you recognize it's
part of a mangled name. I think it is counter-intuitive. Of course, the best
would be to have a "bad allocation" string stored somewhere.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14493
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-10 1:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-08 22:10 [Bug libstdc++/14493] New: new: " debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org
2004-03-08 22:37 ` [Bug libstdc++/14493] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-08 23:15 ` [Bug libstdc++/14493] " bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-09 4:14 ` pme at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-09 4:14 ` phil at jaj dot com
2004-03-09 4:45 ` zack at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-09 5:19 ` doko at cs dot tu-berlin dot de
2004-03-09 18:32 ` jtv at xs4all dot nl
2004-03-09 19:32 ` phil at jaj dot com
2004-03-09 19:48 ` pme at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-09 20:14 ` Zack Weinberg
2004-03-09 20:14 ` zack at codesourcery dot com
2004-03-10 1:12 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it [this message]
2004-03-11 7:35 ` pme at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-11 10:05 ` gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2004-03-11 15:51 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-11 15:52 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-04-27 13:54 ` [Bug libstdc++/14493] std::bad_alloc::what() does not explain what happened pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-08-05 14:37 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
2004-08-05 15:01 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040310011218.30425.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).