Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!texbell!vector!attctc!mic!merlin
From: merlin@mic.UUCP (Merlin Wilkerson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: effect of free()
Summary: no built-ins please.
Message-ID: <285@mic.UUCP>
Date: 10 Sep 89 17:06:46 GMT
References: <319@cubmol.BIO.COLUMBIA.EDU> <3756@buengc.BU.EDU> <1989Aug17.005548.745@twwells.com> <16022@vail.ICO.ISC.COM> <248@seti.inria.fr> <246@ssp1.idca.tds.philips.nl> <172@cpsolv.UUCP> <29110@news.Think.COM> <11018@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Reply-To: merlin@mic.UUCP (Merlin Wilkerson)
Organization: Micro Net
Lines: 17

In article <11018@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>In article <29110@news.Think.COM> barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin) writes:
>>What may be needed to satisfy everyone is a built-in operation that
>>tells whether a pointer is valid to use.
>
>My opinion is that if the programmer doesn't know that without applying
>such a test, his code is out of control.
>
I agree.  I have sort of followed this conversation.  I can't think
of any reason why you would test to see if you had freed allocated 
space.  If need for the space was in fact conditional, I would still
want to get (and free) it explicitly.

built-in operations == built-in bullshit.

--------
merlin