The following regressions in gcc-2.95.3-linux http://tinyurl.com/638l6 http://tinyurl.com/3k6hu are IMHO due to the fact that bad_alloc is defined in <new>, and this header is not included by the corresponding test programs. I'd say it's only out of sheer luck (dependant inclusions) that these tests works for the rest of compilers, but I might be wrong. In any case, #including <new> solves the problem. If noone sees a problem with these patches, I'll commit them. Joaquín M Lópz Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo 16d15 < #include <new> 22d21 < #include <new>
The following regressions in gcc-2.95.3-linux
http://tinyurl.com/638l6 http://tinyurl.com/3k6hu
are IMHO due to the fact that bad_alloc is defined in <new>, and this header is not included by the corresponding test programs. I'd say it's only out of sheer luck (dependant inclusions) that these tests works for the rest of compilers, but I might be wrong.
In any case, #including <new> solves the problem. If noone sees a problem with these patches, I'll commit them.
Good pick up: for some reason I thought bad_alloc was defined in <exception>, but you're right it's in <new>, so go ahead and commit your fix. Ironic that it was an obsolete compiler that picked this up :-) Thanks, John.
participants (2)
-
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz -
John Maddock