https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94527
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> --- David Malcolm: I went with "overloading" attribute malloc in my patch for the reasons I explained my comments on your patch and in the patch submission email. I'm open to changing the name (or the association from the allocator to the deallocator) so long as it's limited to pointers (with integers and other handles handled by some other attribute), and provided it lets users specify the position of the argument in the deallocation function's argument list. David Howells: If/when you have a chance please comment on the design and let us know if you have any concerns.
