Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 23:56:21 +0200 From: joerg@britannica.bec.de To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Return value of malloc(0) Message-ID: <20060628215621.GC18893@britannica.bec.de> In-Reply-To: <20060628181045.GA54915@curry.mchp.siemens.de> References: <20060628181045.GA54915@curry.mchp.siemens.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 08:10:45PM +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote: > (Now malloc returns NULL and firefox doesn't interpret the > result as a pointer to some allocated memory and therefore > doesn't use it). Return NULL for malloc(0) is one of two possible implementations. The other behaviour is to generate a unique pointer for each call. Both behaviours are intentionally allowed by the standard and code making assumptions about either is broken. It should be added that returning NULL for malloc(0) is consistent with realloc, so it is actually nicer. Joerg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060628215621.GC18893>