Re: [AD] c++ test.

[Henrik Stokseth <hensto@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Eric Botcazou wrote:

> > Hmm... this is more intricate than expected, since simply using 'new'
> > requires the program to be linked against libstdc++ with GCC 3.x because
> > of the dependency upon libsupc++. Which in turn requires the autoconf
> > machinery to be tweaked. So I postpone the merging until after 4.1.10 WIP
> > is released.
> >    
>
> I decided to define dumb memory management operators to work around this 
> problem so that we don't have to link against libstdc++ at all. I commited 
> the tweaked test as well as the changes to the configure machinery required 
> under Unix. The non-Unix stuff will quickly follow.
curious... what is the problem? linking against libstdc++ (++ :-) just 
to support new and delete operators is somewhat overkill i agree, but 
how many bytes of crap gets linked in exactly? i think you should avoid 
overloading the new and delete operators if the overhead from the extra 
linked objects (!) is small, which i think is the case.

--
One OS to rule them all,
one OS to find them,
one OS to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them.