On Wednesday 05 March 2003 10:31 am, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Also note that if you don't allow exceptions (which I would _strongly_
> encourage), you can't really use "new" - unless you think it's ok to
> SIGSEGV under low-mem circumstances. Which it might be, of course, in some
> situations.
I may be wrong, but as I understood it C++ already provides a non-exception
version of new ('nothrow' or similar) that will instead return 0 on failure
for just this case. This avoids combining malloc with placement newsall
over. The only disadvantage is having to check for 0 returns everwhere again
rather than having a single exception catcher at some high-level entry point.
Also, 16.6 of the C++ FAQ Lite shows how you can easily replace new's error
handler. You wouldn't even have to worry about testing each new for 0 return
everywhere--just handle it there and you're back to C++ clean-code goodness.
Nick
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The debugger
for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you feeling lost and
disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available on major UNIX
and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
