delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Reply-To: | <al DOT slater AT scluk DOT com> |
From: | "Al Slater" <al DOT slater AT scluk DOT com> |
To: | "'Samuel'" <samuel AT socal DOT rr DOT com>, <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
Subject: | RE: new vs malloc, was BUG - Cygwin to GNU CC compatibility |
Date: | Wed, 7 Aug 2002 15:03:02 +0100 |
Message-ID: | <000601c23e1b$256af1c0$458c0ca4@pavilion> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Priority: | 3 (Normal) |
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal |
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 |
In-Reply-To: | <006001c23e15$1c9d6e70$a352a518@samsystem> |
Importance: | Normal |
X-MDRemoteIP: | 164.12.140.69 |
X-Return-Path: | al DOT slater AT scluk DOT com |
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
[SNIP] > > It sure surprises me that I was the only one that said > something about the > innacuracy; if such a thing were to be said in the > comp.lang.c++ newsgroup > then the remark would get more ridicule than I see people > getting in this > list about anything. Again, if you simply leave off the > "multiple" (and Ross > did not say "multiple") from what you said, your statement is highly > inaccurate. Am I the only one in this list that knows this? > If so then it is > good that I am correcting this error. This is not a "C++ API / data > structure philosophy debate"; it is not a matter of > philosophy; it is a > matter of fact. There have been more than one message > recently asking C++ > questions that were not relevant to CygWin. I have not seen > any messages > saying that they were off-topic. So I do not appreciate being > told that I > should not post a small correction to a huge inaccuracy. I > know that for > sure the C++ experts in the comp.lang.c++ newsgroup often > emphasize that for > every "new" there must be one (and only one) "delete" and for > every "new []" > there must be one (and only one) "delete []", but that is > such a basic thing > that I do not need experts to tell me that. > > All C++ questions should be referred to a more appropriate > list, newsgroup > or forum, since the advice they get in the CygWin list is dangerous. [SNIP] No one replied because it is OFF TOPIC for this list -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |