Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 08 Jul 1999 05:34:07 +0100
From:      Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2)
Message-ID:  <E1125st-0001e1-00@fanf.noc.demon.net>
In-Reply-To: <xzp7locthir.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
References:  <Pine.GSO.4.10.9907052110250.13873-100000@uther.wam.umd.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> wrote:
>
>Don't use err() indiscriminately after a malloc() failure; malloc()
>doesn't set errno.

When I looked at malloc(3) I decided that it relied on sbrk(2) to set
errno if it returned 0. Is this wrong? i.e. can it return 0 without
a failed syscall?

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch   dot@dotat.at   fanf@demon.net
Winner, International Obfuscated C Code Competition 1998


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?E1125st-0001e1-00>