deps: define missing operator delete functions - #10356
Closed
bnoordhuis wants to merge 2 commits into
Closed
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Sorry, something went wrong.
Section 3.2 of the C++ standard states that destructor definitions implicitly "use" operator delete functions. Therefore, these operator delete functions must be defined even if they are never called by user code explicitly. http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#261 gcc allows them to remain as empty definitions. However, not all compilers allow this. This pull request creates definitions which if ever called, result in an abort.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
|
Does the V8 patch level need to be bumped? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
|
CI 2: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit/6742/ (I think the failures in the first CI were unrelated) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
Yes. I'll do that when I land it. (Could have done that right away, come to think of it, not much risk of a conflict at this stage.) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
addaleax
approved these changes
Dec 20, 2016
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
|
lgtm, can you expedite this one and do the V8 bump please @bnoordhuis? gotta get this release done. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
rvagg
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2016
Section 3.2 of the C++ standard states that destructor definitions implicitly "use" operator delete functions. Therefore, these operator delete functions must be defined even if they are never called by user code explicitly. http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#261 gcc allows them to remain as empty definitions. However, not all compilers allow this. This pull request creates definitions which if ever called, result in an abort. PR-URL: #10356 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <rod@vagg.org>
gibfahn
pushed a commit
to ibmruntimes/node
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2016
Section 3.2 of the C++ standard states that destructor definitions implicitly "use" operator delete functions. Therefore, these operator delete functions must be defined even if they are never called by user code explicitly. http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#261 gcc allows them to remain as empty definitions. However, not all compilers allow this. This pull request creates definitions which if ever called, result in an abort. PR-URL: nodejs/node#10356 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <rod@vagg.org>
gibfahn
pushed a commit
to ibmruntimes/node
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2016
Section 3.2 of the C++ standard states that destructor definitions implicitly "use" operator delete functions. Therefore, these operator delete functions must be defined even if they are never called by user code explicitly. http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#261 gcc allows them to remain as empty definitions. However, not all compilers allow this. This pull request creates definitions which if ever called, result in an abort. PR-URL: nodejs/node#10356 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <rod@vagg.org>
jBarz
added a commit
to ibmruntimes/node
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2016
Section 3.2 of the C++ standard states that destructor definitions implicitly "use" operator delete functions. Therefore, these operator delete functions must be defined even if they are never called by user code explicitly. http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#261 gcc allows them to remain as empty definitions. However, not all compilers allow this. This pull request creates definitions which if ever called, result in an abort. PR-URL: nodejs/node#10356 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <rod@vagg.org>
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
Refs #10173, includes the changes to Isolate and SealHandleScope.
Section 3.2 of the C++ standard states that destructor definitions
implicitly "use" operator delete functions. Therefore, these operator
delete functions must be defined even if they are never called by
user code explicitly.
http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#261
gcc allows them to remain as empty definitions. However, not all
compilers allow this.
This pull request creates definitions which if ever called, result
in an abort.
@jBarz I've used your ca.ibm.com email address as the author email.
CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/5487/