On 11.02.2015 19:02, Matt Turner wrote: > 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? >
Checking after realloc return value wouldn't help much here because there is no way to return anything which would indicate 'failed'. The way this 'allocate' method is used doesn't also help in this case thus new would throw catchable error instead of just segfaulting or causing randomness. /Juha-Pekka _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
