On 11/06/2015 01:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 5 November 2015 at 23:31, Daniel Gutson
>> The issue is, as I understand it, to do the actual work of operator >> new, i.e. allocate memory. It should force >> us to copy most of the code of the original code of operator new, >> which may change on new versions of the >> STL, forcing us to keep updated. > > It can just call malloc, and the replacement operator delete can call free. > > That is very unlikely to need to change (which is corroborated by the > fact that the default definitions in libsupc++ change very rarely). Or perhaps libsupc++ could provide the default operator new under a __default_operator_new alias or some such, so that the user-defined replacement can fallback to calling it. Likewise for op delete. Thanks, Pedro Alves
