2 ms·
Author's argument against using C++ isn't true. New/delete can be easily redefined to use malloc/free [0]. You can compile (a bit limited) C++ code without any
by duckingtest 12y ago
Author's argument against using C++ isn't true. New/delete can be easily redefined to use malloc/free [0]. You can compile (a bit limited) C++ code without any special C++ dependencies.
[0] http://ptspts.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-to-write-c-program-without-libstdc.html http://ptspts.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-to-write-c-program-wi...
- dsp1234 12y agoThe author's only argument against C++ is located in the article comments and is "Regarding the use of C++, that's a non-starter; malloc goes in libc!". As the author was replacing the malloc[0][1] implementation, that seems a reasonable argument. [0] - http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=jemalloc&sektion=3 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=jemalloc&sektion=3 [1] - http://www.canonware.com/jemalloc/ http://www.canonware.com/jemalloc/