From 5733224790513819003 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,ba46df2c00e31ceb X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-27 13:05:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!news.alt.net!comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail From: "William M. Miller" Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Why no size_t in global operator delete? Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:03:40 CST Organization: Altopia Corp. - Usenet Access - www.altopia.com Lines: 34 Approved: Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++ Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Orig-NNTP-Posting-Host: 144-212-111-151.mathworks.com (144.212.111.151) X-Orig-X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1077893656 54558466 I 144.212.111.151 ([166721]) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-mulga_r1 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.2 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60-mulga_r1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:1240 Scott Meyers wrote: > Classes can declare an operator delete that has the runtime system provide > the size of the just-destructed-object whose memory is being deallocated: > > void operator delete(void *ptr, size_t sizeOfFormerObject); > > Does anybody know why there is no global operator delete with this same > signature? A client of mine claims to have a good reason for wanting to > know the size of the memory being deallocated by the global operator > delete, and when he asked me why there was no global version like the class > version taking a size_t, I found that I had no idea why such a version is > missing. Is there a good technical basis for the omission? The difference is that a class gives you a way of determining whether the (void*, size_t) signature is the "usual" deallocation function or an overload ("placement") version (3.7.3.2p2). The two-parameter version is only a "usual" deallocation function if the class does not declare the single-parameter version. The global deallocation functions are always declared everywhere (with one parameter), so a two-parameter version can only be a "placement" deallocation function. -- William M. Miller, The MathWorks, Inc. wmm@world.std.com --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]