Displaying 1 result from an estimated 1 matches for "998628".
Did you mean:
198628
2008 May 01
3
[LLVMdev] optimization assumes malloc return is non-null
(Hi Mike!)
On May 1, 2008, at 6:11 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2008, at 9:26 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>> Personally to me, I have a bigger axe to grind with C++ operator new.
>> AFAIK, the standard doesn't give leeway to do a number of interesting
>> optimizations for new/delete because the user is explicitly allowed
>> to
>> override them and the std