From 1171656105264162982 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,8372ae6de42be399 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-01 09:50:08 PST Return-Path: X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f 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!cyclone.swbell.net!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!216.196.106.144!border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.usenetserver.com!cyclone.bc.net!news.alt.net!comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu From: Michiel.Salters@cmg.nl (Michiel Salters) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Array of size 0 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <403601F6.8010706@ircad.u-strasbg.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1078159493 29513 127.0.0.1 (1 Mar 2004 16:44:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 16:44:53 +0000 (UTC) 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 Approved: Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 11:45:57 CST Lines: 27 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:1254 Gabriel Dos Reis wrote in message news:... > "Andrew Koenig" writes: > > | If new is permitted to return zero, then every call to new must have a > | corresponding test (although it might be possible to combine multiple tests > | into one). > > But, I would not argue for new to return zero :-) I would argue for > whatever it returns, when it returns, be a dereferenceable value so > that calls don't have to make the corresponding checks. What's that got to do with new T[0]? Whatever new T[n] returns, you can dereference only n Ts in that array, and (new T[n])+n is a valid expression for a pointer you can't dereference. Adding an exception so that new T[0] gives you 1 T* you can dereference doesn't solve any of my problems. Regards, -- Michiel Salters --- [ 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 ]