Fixing STR #2881 (Check image bounds before allocation) requires
to check for failed memory allocation. Without exception handling,
I believe the only way to do it is:
#include new
...
array = new(std::nothrow) char[xxx];
if (!array) longjmp(xxx, 1);
which violates the CMP because it
Fixing STR #2881 (Check image bounds before allocation) requires
to check for failed memory allocation. Without exception handling,
I believe the only way to do it is:
#include new
...
array = new(std::nothrow) char[xxx];
if (!array) longjmp(xxx, 1);
which violates the CMP
Fixing STR #2881 (Check image bounds before allocation) requires
to check for failed memory allocation. Without exception handling,
I believe the only way to do it is:
=
#include new
...
array = new(std::nothrow) char[xxx];
if (!array) longjmp(xxx, 1);
=
On 16.10.2012, at 10:42, MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK)
ian.macart...@selexgalileo.com wrote:
Reawakening this thread.
+1 for 1.3.1 release, with the ABI breaking stuff turned off by default,
and calling it 1.3.1 (not .2)
Yes. I probably voted before (!) but I'm +1 on just
Hi,
On Nov 5, 2012, at 6:00 AM, MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK)
ian.macart...@selexgalileo.com wrote:
Fixing STR #2881 (Check image bounds before allocation) requires
to check for failed memory allocation. Without exception handling,
I believe the only way to do it is:
=
#include
On 5 Nov 2012, at 20:55, LZAntal wrote:
Fixing STR #2881 (Check image bounds before allocation) requires
to check for failed memory allocation. Without exception handling,
I believe the only way to do it is:
=
#include new
...
array = new(std::nothrow) char[xxx];
if (!array)
Hi,
On Nov 5, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Ian MacArthur imacart...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 Nov 2012, at 20:55, LZAntal wrote:
Fixing STR #2881 (Check image bounds before allocation) requires
to check for failed memory allocation. Without exception handling,
I believe the only way to do it is:
=
On 11/05/12 11:05, Matthias Melcher wrote:
On 16.10.2012, at 10:42, MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK)
ian.macart...@selexgalileo.com wrote:
Reawakening this thread.
+1 for 1.3.1 release, with the ABI breaking stuff turned off by default,
and calling it 1.3.1 (not .2)
Yes. I
