From: cuzdav@googlemail.com   
      
   { Quoted banner and blank lines in quoted section removed -mod }   
      
   On Monday, July 1, 2013 4:47:31 PM UTC-5, alan_mc...@this.is.invalid   
   wrote:   
   > I keep seeing code of the form   
   >   
   >      T *t = new T( arg1, ... );   
   >      if ( t )   
   >      {   
   >         // code that uses t   
   >      }   
   ...   
   > So can I tell people who write code like this that the "if" is   
   > redundant?  Or are there obscure cases where "new" might return a   
   > null pointer?   
      
   Yes, you can tell them that.   
      
   Provided no local overrides of operator new are used, there are no   
   other obscure corner cases where new can return null.   
      
   Note, there is one case where it can return null but I wouldn't call   
   it "obscure" since it explicitly states it throws no exceptions:   
      
      #include    
      ...   
      
      T * t = new (std::nothrow) T(<...args...> );   
      
      if (!t)   
        ... alloc failed   
      
      
   Chris   
      
   > (Note: class T does not override any flavor of operator new.  Also,   
   > this is not C++77 or something.)   
      
   --   
         [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]   
         [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)