From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6b1a1ed8b075945
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Allocators and exceptions
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 02:23:57 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1189502637.004999.180770@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
References: <1189323618.588340.87180@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
   <1189439048.467517.186160@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
   <jrqvdhj7el2s$.dt1ka4tzf6l3$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.138.37.241
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1189502637 9359 127.0.0.1 (11 Sep 2007 09:23:57
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:23:57 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <jrqvdhj7el2s$.dt1ka4tzf6l3$.dlg@40tude.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.8.0.12) Gecko/20070724 Red Hat/1.5.0.12-0.3.slc3
 Firefox/1.5.0.12,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.138.37.241;
   posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:1884
Date: 2007-09-11T02:23:57-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 11 Wrz, 11:14, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:

> I think the wording Maciej used was wrong. He actually should say:
>
> For each Allocate called while execution of new, a matching Deallocate is
> called with the same storage pool, address, size and alignment as they were
> in the Allocate.

Bingo.

However, to complete the picture, the components that were already
initialized and might require finalization should be finalized.

> The ultimate effects of Allocate and Deallocate on the memory are
> irrelevant.

Right. Even if the compiler does not guarantee the reclamation in
standard pool, I can provide my own with my own guarantees. The point
is to hook the appropriate calls.

--
Maciej Sobczak
http://www.msobczak.com/