Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 05:00:50 +0100 From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> To: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> Cc: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>, standards@freebsd.org, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Re: Q&D implementation of dlfunc() Message-ID: <20020529050050.B30428@chiark.greenend.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20020528203235.jdp@polstra.com>; from jdp@polstra.com on Tue, May 28, 2002 at 08:32:35PM -0700 References: <20020529034849.A30428@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <XFMail.20020528203235.jdp@polstra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 08:32:35PM -0700, John Polstra wrote: > Garrett, your patch looks fine to me. I do agree with Tony, though, > that it would be better to use a unique struct as the argument. > Actually I think I'd prefer a pointer to the unique struct, but it > doesn't really make any difference. It does -- consider the following: void *p = malloc(10); dlfunc(NULL, "free")(p); Tony. -- f.a.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ SOUTHEAST ICELAND: EAST OR SOUTHEAST 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 LATER. RAIN OR SHOWERS. MODERATE, OCCASIONALLY POOR. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020529050050.B30428>