Improve default allocator wording #501
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The spec currently implies (by my reading) that the default allocator can never fail (even on e.g. memory exhaustion). So the spec makes a stronger guarantee than the named allocator requirement, which probably isn't implementable. The modified wording weakens the guarantee to allow for allocations to fail.
gmlueck
approved these changes
Nov 22, 2023
TApplencourt
approved these changes
Nov 22, 2023
keryell
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 10, 2024
Improve default allocator wording
gmlueck
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2024
Improve default allocator wording (cherry picked from commit 81e9a2f)
gmlueck
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2024
Improve default allocator wording (cherry picked from commit 81e9a2f)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The spec currently implies (by my reading) that the default allocator can never fail (even on e.g. memory exhaustion). So the spec makes a stronger guarantee than the named allocator requirement, which probably isn't implementable.
The modified wording weakens the guarantee to allow allocations to fail.