I've two notes to the description of <new>:
----------------------------------------------------------
18.4.1.1[lib.new.delete.single]
in void* operator new (size_t) throw(bad_alloc);
and void* operator new (size_t, nothrow&) throw();
> ..
> Default behavior:
> ..
> - ... Otherwise, if the last argument to set_new_handler()
>  was a null pointer (*), ...

Either there an addition missing:

 (*) or if set_new_handler() has never been called.

or it would be shorter to say:

 ..., if the current new_handler is a null pointer, ...

(and more consistant to the other uses of 'the current new_handler'
like in the following sentence: -Otherwise, the function calls the
current new_handler ..).

----------------------------------------------------------
> - The loop terminates ... or when a called new_handler function
>   does not return.

Shouldn't this be clarified anlogously to operator new(size_t, nothrow&) throw():
 If the called new_handler function terminates by throwing a
 bad_alloc exception, this execption is promoted to the caller of
 operator new.

[Funny: When a called function does _not_ return, then it's
callee terminates. :-) ]

Ulf Schuenemann

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ulf Sch   nemann
Fakult   t f   r Informatik, Technische Universit   t M   nchen, Germany.
email: schuenem@informatik.tu-muenchen.de