public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "paolo.carlini at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/57632] Operator new overloads with stdc++11 enabled looses exception specifier (MacOsX)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:45:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-57632-4-wZIWxk8IuW@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-57632-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57632

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
This happens on Linux too. The issue is that per C++11 (see 18.6) operator new
is declared in <new> as:

  void* operator new(size_t mem);                  (1)

and as such is internally pre-declared in decl.c:cxx_init_decl_processing.
Then, if I understand correctly, when the parser sees in user code:

  void* operator new(size_t mem) throw(std::bad_alloc);

it thinks, Ok the user is just redeclaring (1), it simply ignores the exception
specifier. Then the additional declaration in user code is seen inconsistent
with the former one (it becomes clear that the exception specifier was dropped
the first time).

We (used to) have a completely similar, dual, issue in C++98 for this user
code:

void* operator new(std::size_t mem);
void* operator new(std::size_t mem);

and I'm not sure whether and how we want to do better.

Note that changing in C++11 the user code to:

void* operator new(std::size_t mem);
void* operator new(std::size_t mem);

is perfectly fine.


  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-17  9:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-17  5:51 [Bug c++/57632] New: " basv@odd-e.com
2013-06-17  9:45 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com [this message]
2022-01-07  5:49 ` [Bug c++/57632] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-07 12:47 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-07 23:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-08  3:38 ` [Bug c++/57632] diagonistic for different exception specifier/noexcept if decl is declared twice should be improved pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

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=bug-57632-4-wZIWxk8IuW@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --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).