https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117470
Bug ID: 117470
Summary: new expression invalid size handling
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
https://eel.is/c++draft/expr.new#8.6 says that for invalid sizes ::operator
new{,[]}
shouldn't be called (at least when not constant evaluating it), but either
throw or result in nullptr.
Now, for -fexceptions and new int[s] for VARYING size_t s we call
__cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length which supposedly throws the right exception
(haven't tested) if there is overflow or size too large, which looks good, but
for
new (std::nothrow) int[s]; my reading is that for -fexceptions it shouldn't
throw, but result in nullptr, but we still call
__cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length.
For -fno-exceptions, we call ::operator new{,[]} always, but for the
overflows/too large sizes with ~size_t(0) argument which supposedly should
throw or return NULL;
is that correct? I mean, when the standard says ::operator new{,[]} shouldn't
be called...
Also from the POV of the allocation DCE, calling ::operator new* when the
standard says it shouldn't be called looks problematic, because then the
optimization can happily remove the ::operator new*/::operator delete* pair.
