[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Devel] problem with ft_mem_debug_realloc
From: |
Antoine Leca |
Subject: |
Re: [Devel] problem with ft_mem_debug_realloc |
Date: |
Thu, 6 May 2004 17:13:11 +0200 |
On Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:16 AM
Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> va escriure:
[ realloc tests if passed pointer is NULL and chokes ]
> Why? According to the realloc() man page,
> this case is equivalent to malloc(), thus valid.
And according to the C standard also.
However, some seem to have (or have had) other ideas at this respect.
Look at <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-04/msg00153.html>. It is
well known for free(NULL) that should be avoided, but the guy here also
mentionned realloc(NULL, )...
A further refined research
(http://www.google.es/search?hl=xx-hacker&q=realloc+sunos) shows quite
repeatedly that some obsolete but widely used distro is convicted here. I
never had the chance to test it, but it is probably something that might be
taken in account.
And yes, I am sorry, because it will make things messier.
OTOH, we can easily say "we need an ANSI compiler, and some level of
compliance of the ANSI library as well; for example realloc(NULL, ) should
work." A adequate test in autoconf might be a good thing to consider as
well, if possible (don't trust AC_FUNC_REALLOC though, it is too picky: it
insists that realloc(, 0) returns non-NULL, which is another story
entirely.)
In fact, *this* is probably the way to go. Go ANSI, go!
Antoine