Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 07:47:37 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why not another style thread? (was Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen getgrent.c) Message-ID: <26015.977122057@critter> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:59:30 MST." <200012180459.VAA87790@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200012180459.VAA87790@harmony.village.org>, Warner Losh writes: >Number 2. ANSI-C (aka c89) requires that free(NULL) work. We >shouldn't go out of our way to pander to those machines where it >doesn't. The reason why this is so is that it is legal for realloc(ptr, 0): to return either a NULL pointer or a real pointer, and to remain consistent, the following sequence should always be legal: ptr = malloc(foo); ptr = realloc(foo, bar); free(ptr); -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. 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?26015.977122057>