Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 13:43:13 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: dag-erli@ifi.uio.no (Dag-Erling Coidan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ) Cc: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Realloc fix for review Message-ID: <199808201943.NAA07889@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <xzplnoj8uq9.fsf@skejdbrimir.ifi.uio.no> References: <199808201619.KAA20970@harmony.village.org> <xzplnoj8uq9.fsf@skejdbrimir.ifi.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Recently, OpenBSD went through their source tree and fixed all > > instances of > > a = realloc(a, size); > > with > > na = realloc(a, size); > > if (!na) > > free(a); > > a = na; > > Is that really a good idea? If you free the old block when realloc() > fails, you lose whatever data was in it (and therefore potentially > lose the ability to generate a sensible error message or recover > gracefully). Umm, reread the code again. His realloc frees the old block when realloc *succeeds*, not fails. However, is there any case when you want to copy the data from the old pointer into the new pointer, which would also be a lose with the suggested change. (I don't know if this is legal or not...) Naet To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199808201943.NAA07889>