https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87544
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > But the standard explicitly requires the > allocator to be stupid, so I'm not sure what more libstdc++ can do here. I think the standard specifies the fallback value in allocator_traits for allocators that do not provide max_size (we could open an issue asking for more freedom in the choice of this value, as long as there is a default, and maybe also the freedom to return something smaller than a.max_size() when that value is provided), but it does not specify what std::allocator::max_size should return (though this function is deprecated), so we could edit new_allocator (and malloc_allocator, etc).
