Title
Missing case in specification of safely-derived pointers
Status
cd2
Section
_N4885_6.7.5.5.4 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]
Submitter
Jens Maurer

Created on 2008-10-14.00:00:00 last changed 143 months ago

Messages

Date: 2009-10-15.00:00:00

[Voted into WP at October, 2009 meeting.]

Date: 2009-09-15.00:00:00

Proposed resolution (September, 2009):

Change _N4885_6.7.5.5.4 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety] paragraph 2, bullet 2, as follows:

  • the result of taking the address of a subobject of an lvalue an object (or one of its subobjects) designated by an lvalue resulting from dereferencing a safely-derived pointer value;
Date: 2022-01-06.00:00:00
N2800 comment DEĀ 3

The bullets in _N4885_6.7.5.5.4 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety] paragraph 2 do not appear to cover the following example:

   int& i = *new int(5);
   // do something with i
   delete &i;

Should &i be a safely-derived pointer value?

History
Date User Action Args
2010-03-29 00:00:00adminsetstatus: dr -> cd2
2009-11-08 00:00:00adminsetmessages: + msg2427
2009-11-08 00:00:00adminsetstatus: tentatively ready -> dr
2009-09-29 00:00:00adminsetmessages: + msg2291
2009-09-29 00:00:00adminsetstatus: drafting -> tentatively ready
2009-03-23 00:00:00adminsetstatus: open -> drafting
2008-10-14 00:00:00admincreate