* Can we replace memory allocation in eh_alloc.cc with operator new(std::size_t) and operator delete(void*,std::size_t) noexcept
@ 2021-02-26 0:18 sotrdg sotrdg
2021-02-27 13:07 ` Jonathan Wakely
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: sotrdg sotrdg @ 2021-02-26 0:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libstdc++
Because freestanding C++ probably does not provide malloc/free.
BTW. That will allow some performance improvement when we override global new/global delete.
Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we replace memory allocation in eh_alloc.cc with operator new(std::size_t) and operator delete(void*,std::size_t) noexcept
2021-02-26 0:18 Can we replace memory allocation in eh_alloc.cc with operator new(std::size_t) and operator delete(void*,std::size_t) noexcept sotrdg sotrdg
@ 2021-02-27 13:07 ` Jonathan Wakely
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Wakely @ 2021-02-27 13:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sotrdg sotrdg; +Cc: libstdc++
On 26/02/21 00:18 +0000, sotrdg sotrdg via Libstdc++ wrote:
>Because freestanding C++ probably does not provide malloc/free.
>
>BTW. That will allow some performance improvement when we override global new/global delete.
What will happen when operator new tries to throw bad_alloc?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-02-27 13:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-02-26 0:18 Can we replace memory allocation in eh_alloc.cc with operator new(std::size_t) and operator delete(void*,std::size_t) noexcept sotrdg sotrdg
2021-02-27 13:07 ` Jonathan Wakely
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).