https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #5 from Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1 at gmail dot com> --- So while the standard says that over-aligned types dont have to be supported, it also says in 3.11/9 in http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4296.pdf that: > If a request for a specific extended alignment in a specific context is not > supported by an implementation, > the program is ill-formed. Additionally, a request for runtime allocation of > dynamic storage for which the > requested alignment cannot be honored shall be treated as an allocation > failure In my naive understanding, that sounds like if over-aligned allocation is not supported then it must be an allocation failure (i.e. not fail silently to honor alignment). That's relevant because failing all over-allocated allocations is probably not something that a compiler could do in the real world (that would break a lot of existing software) and so this 3.11/9 clause might then be de-facto forcing compilers to support over-allocated allocation. What do you think? How else would you interprete 3.11/9?
