From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jwakely@redhat.com>
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com
 (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C483B386F46E
 for <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 13:07:13 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org C483B386F46E
Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com
 [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id
 us-mta-418-91mQwh83NaO6-hjZiVhFbw-1; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 08:07:11 -0500
X-MC-Unique: 91mQwh83NaO6-hjZiVhFbw-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
 [10.5.11.22])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ED6A803F47;
 Sat, 27 Feb 2021 13:07:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.33.36.11])
 by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEAFF10023BE;
 Sat, 27 Feb 2021 13:07:09 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 13:07:09 +0000
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: sotrdg sotrdg <euloanty@live.com>
Cc: libstdc++ <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Can we replace memory allocation in eh_alloc.cc with operator
 new(std::size_t) and operator delete(void*,std::size_t) noexcept
Message-ID: <20210227130709.GK3008@redhat.com>
References: <CH2PR02MB652292C4A1620670C9B61298B29D9@CH2PR02MB6522.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR02MB652292C4A1620670C9B61298B29D9@CH2PR02MB6522.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
 DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,
 TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Libstdc++ mailing list <libstdc++.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/libstdc++>,
 <mailto:libstdc++-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/>
List-Post: <mailto:libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libstdc++-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libstdc++>,
 <mailto:libstdc++-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 13:07:15 -0000

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?