Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve

From	Manfred <noname@add.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve
Date	2021-06-01 20:21 +0200
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<s95trr$1bna$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(18 earlier) <d0fabaf2-7bc4-4297-9989-bfbeb376b8f0n@googlegroups.com> <ihmlopF4ff6U1@mid.individual.net> <s95e8b$a8p$1@dont-email.me> <s95lin$16jr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <s95pus$10s$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/1/2021 7:15 PM, David Brown wrote:
> On 01/06/2021 18:00, Manfred wrote:
>> On 6/1/2021 3:55 PM, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 01/06/2021 13:59, Bo Persson wrote:
>>>> On 2021-06-01 at 00:20, daniel...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, May 31, 2021 at 5:43:23 PM UTC-4, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>>>> David Brown <david...@hesbynett.no> writes:
>>>>>>> On 31/05/2021 00:15, daniel...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:47:50 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The definition of intmax_t is a problem - it is a limitation for
>>>>>>>>> integer
>>>>>>>>> types in C and C++. Hopefully eventually deprecate intmax_t.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One proposal is to make intmax_t mean int64_t, and leave it at that.
>>>>>>>> Have no requirement that integer types can't be larger. No more ABI
>>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It might make more sense to tie it to "long long int" rather than
>>>>>>> "int64_t", but someone would first have to check if it affected any
>>>>>>> real
>>>>>>> implementations before making such a change. But yes, that might be a
>>>>>>> way out and a way forward.
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would allow intmax_t to be 128 bits on implementations with
>>>>>> 128-bit long long (are there any?), which seems like a good idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the point of both these proposals is purely for backward
>>>>>> compatibility, avoiding breaking code that already uses [u]intmax_t.
>>>>>> Both of them destroy the point of intmax_t, providing a type that's
>>>>>> guaranteed to be the longest integer type. Should intmax_t be
>>>>>> deprecated?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. "Give me the biggest integer type there is" is not a reasonable
>>>>> thing to ask for, in any code that is intended to be portable across
>>>>> platforms
>>>>> or over time on the same platform. You may as well have intwhatever_t.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that we in general don't know what "whatever" is. At the
>>>> time when intmax_t was introduced, at least in C there were
>>>> implementations with 36 bit ints and 72-bit longs. So just using int64_t
>>>> would not be portable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Have there ever been C99 compilers for 36-bit int machines?  Were there
>>> even conforming C90 compilers?
>>>
>>> AFAIK (and I fully admit my knowledge may be lacking), the only systems
>>> that made it past the 1980's which did not have two's complement signed
>>> integers with 8-bit bytes and power-of-two sized integer types are some
>>> DSPs and other niche embedded devices (for which no one would use an
>>> integer type without knowing /exactly/ how big it is), and
>>> Burroughs/Unisys systems for legacy compatibility.
>>>
>>> My suggestion would be to lock intmax_t to "long long", which would keep
>>> compatibility here (including for systems that have 128-bit long long,
>>> if there are any other than a hypothetical RISC-V version).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think this would be problematic as well, or at least useless and
>> confusing.
>> The idea for intmax_t is to give a standard name to the widest integer
>> type that is available, which is by definition implementation defined.
>> Having intmax_t an alias for "long long" would change its meaning to the
>> widest /standard/ integer type defined by the standard itself - a
>> useless repetition (we have "long long" for that), and confusing too,
>> given its change in meaning.
> 
> Yes, that is all true.  The point is not to find another useful purpose
> for intmax_t - the point is to get rid of it, marking it as deprecated,
> but to do so in a way that won't break existing code.
> 
> I am at a loss to understand why anyone would have a use for intmax_t in
> the first place.
The use I see is with imaxdiv and friends as I wrote below, at least 
this is my understanding.

   When would you want an integer type whose sole
> characteristic is "big" ?  To me, it is logical to want a type that is
> at least N bits, or exactly N bits.  These requirements are covered by
> the normal "short", "int", "long" and "long long" types, or - better for
> my use, but not necessarily other people's - the <stdint.h> fixed size
> types.  "intmax_t" gives you absolutely /nothing/ that "long long" does not.
> 
> Given that there are, as far as we know, no implementations where
> intmax_t does not correspond directly to "long long", I would like to
> see "intmax_t" be dropped to the maximum extent allowable by backwards
> compatibility.
> 
>>
>> As far as I understand the purpose for intmax_t is to allow for (sort
>> of) 'standard' prototypes of functions like imaxabs, imaxdiv, strtoimax,
>> etc that are supposed to operate on larger integer types - these are the
>> only functions that take this kind of arguments.
>> The confusing part is that all of these facilities are implementation
>> dependent, so even if they are part of the standard they are /not/
>> portable, meaning that the programmer is supposed (the way I see it) to
>> use them under the guard of appropriate preprocessor directives.
>>
>> The use for them is to allow the programmer to use some optimized
>> routines for larger types, if available.
> 
> But they don't allow that.  If you are trying to make optimised routines
> for larger types, you need to know your sizes - you either use
> implementation extensions (like __int128), or fixed size types, or if
> you need maximal portability, you use "int_fast64_t".

When I wrote "use" I didn't mean "make". I meant imaxdiv may be a 128 
bit division routine provided by the implementation that the programmer 
can to use without the need to write one, possible a less efficient one.

> 
>>
>> For example, in case operations like ldiv are needed on 128 bit
>> integers, then IF the implementation supports 128 bit intmax_t then
>> imaxdiv can be a better choice rather than implementing your own routine
>> - note that /IF/ is the keyword here, that should map directly to
>> appropriate #if directives.
>>
> 
> The situation we have now is that on a compiler like gcc you can get
> 128-bit division using __int128, but /not/ using intmax_t.  It is a
> useless type.
> 

The way I see it this is a problem with gcc, not with the standard. 
Unless the committee managed to produce some wording that is too 
problematic for __int128 to fit as extended integer type.

Note that I am not talking about plain integer division (the '/' 
operator) I am talking about 128 bit ldiv.
Now we have div, ldiv and lldiv too (supposedly for 64 bit), but instead 
of going on with llldiv, and then llllllllldiv, they decided to stop 
with imaxdiv. It makes sense.

>> It's most probably somewhat a niche field of use (possibly growing due
>> to the diffuse demand for cryptography), or meant for applications that
>> are supposed to be run on hardware that is known to support the
>> appropriate types, so that the #if directives can be as simple as
>> denying compilation for implementations that don't have a wide enough
>> intmax_t.
>>
>> My 2c.
>

Thread

recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 20:46 -0500
  Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 20:50 -0500
    Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 20:52 -0500
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-25 07:47 +0300
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 12:20 -0500
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-05-26 08:36 +0200
            Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 13:28 -0500
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 12:56 +0200
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-25 14:55 +0000
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-25 18:42 +0300
            Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve MrSpook_Ann1u@d0v_5eh1bqgd.com - 2021-05-25 16:10 +0000
              Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 18:23 +0200
              Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-25 19:57 +0300
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve MrSpook_ddZgr4t4@okc9_pd48oig5.info - 2021-05-26 07:15 +0000
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 09:22 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-26 10:54 +0300
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve MrSpook_dw5lvA4g@kak0_42x.edu - 2021-05-26 08:29 +0000
            Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Nikolaj Lazic <nlazicBEZ_OVOGA@mudrac.ffzg.hr> - 2021-05-25 16:21 +0000
              Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-25 20:04 +0300
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 12:46 -0500
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-25 20:58 +0300
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 13:48 -0500
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Nikolaj Lazic <nlazicBEZ_OVOGA@mudrac.ffzg.hr> - 2021-05-25 18:23 +0000
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 13:49 -0500
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 21:07 -0500
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 18:23 +0200
  Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 22:33 -0500
    Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 22:35 -0500
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-25 05:16 +0000
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 13:00 +0200
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 12:49 -0500
  Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 14:08 -0500
    Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-27 21:59 +0000
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 15:33 -0700
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 15:58 -0700
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 18:17 -0500
            Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 16:58 -0700
              Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-27 18:36 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 21:38 -0500
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-28 08:53 +0300
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-05-28 09:47 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 19:54 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-27 21:02 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-28 12:09 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-28 20:26 +0000
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-28 17:10 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-29 11:47 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2021-05-30 15:15 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-31 08:33 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2021-05-31 08:21 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-31 18:13 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-31 14:43 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-31 14:44 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2021-05-31 15:20 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-06-01 11:17 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-01 20:25 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-06-01 16:55 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-02 09:06 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-06-05 17:50 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-06 11:10 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-06-06 04:07 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-06-06 07:49 -0400
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-01 20:21 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-02 09:29 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-02 18:43 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-02 23:32 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-03 00:49 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-03 09:08 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-03 10:53 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-03 16:20 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-06-03 11:20 -0400
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-03 19:04 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-06-03 22:24 +0000
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-06-03 16:27 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-06-04 00:36 +0000
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-04 08:46 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-06-05 22:02 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-06 11:17 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-06 18:39 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-06-06 16:33 -0700
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-07 08:41 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-06 17:46 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve MrSpook_Qfmtjdmi@nc6.com - 2021-06-06 14:11 +0000
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-03 16:43 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-06-01 18:00 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-01 19:15 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-01 15:55 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-06-01 13:59 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-06-01 13:26 -0500
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-01 08:29 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-06-01 14:05 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-06-01 15:58 +0200
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-06-01 11:33 -0400
                Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-06-01 10:52 -0700
            Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-27 23:16 -0400
            Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-28 14:34 +0000
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 18:19 -0500
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-28 03:47 +0200
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-27 17:45 -0500
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-28 14:38 +0000
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-28 16:44 +0200
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-28 16:42 +0200
          Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-28 18:22 +0300
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-28 08:47 +0300
  Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 06:16 +0200
    Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 13:30 -0500
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 20:37 +0200
        Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 14:09 -0500
  Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 18:33 +0200
    Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 13:32 -0500
      Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-05-27 07:50 +0200
  Re: recovering from std::bad_alloc in std::string reserve "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-06-01 17:35 -0700

csiph-web