Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Juha-Pekka Heikkila > <juhapekka.heikk...@gmail.com> wrote: >> There is no error path available thus instead of giving >> realloc possibility to fail use new which will never >> return null pointer and throws bad_alloc on failure. > > The problem was that we weren't checking if realloc failed. > > Why is the solution to change from malloc/free to new/delete?
The new operator is guaranteed not to return NULL by the C++ standard. Aside from that Juha-Pekka's code seems more idiomatic to me than calling realloc() from a C++ source file, but that might just be a matter of taste. > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
pgpOUFFrsUaJd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
