https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103162
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- "A derived class shall implement this function to return a pointer to allocated storage (6.7.5.5.2) with a size of at least bytes, aligned to the specified alignment." And 6.7.5.5.2 says: "An allocation function attempts to allocate the requested amount of storage. If it is successful, it returns the address of the start of a block of storage whose length in bytes is at least as large as the requested size. [...] If the request succeeds, the value returned by a replaceable allocation function is a non-null pointer value ([basic.compound]) p0 different from any previously returned value p1, [...]" It says it's non-null. The attribute is not there to catch bugs in memory resources, it's there to tell the compiler that the returned pointer is not null, and so it can optimize accordingly. In an environment where 0 is a valid address, does -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks make any difference?
