Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!pilchuck!dataio!fnx!nazgul!bright
From: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Just a minor new twist on free()
Message-ID: <133@nazgul.UUCP>
Date: 1 Nov 90 03:46:04 GMT
References: <7365@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <PDS.90Oct1095707@lemming.webo.dg.com> <1990Oct02.132313.6659@virtech.uucp> <117@nazgul.UUCP> <280@audfax.audiofax.com>
Reply-To: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Organization: Zortech, Seattle
Lines: 11

In article <280@audfax.audiofax.com> arnold@audiofax.com (Arnold Robbins) writes:
<In article <117@nazgul.UUCP> bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright) writes:
<>    #define free(p)	((p) && free(p))
<Note that this requires an ANSI compliant cpp or C compiler.  The original
<discussion was about using an ANSI compiler with non-ansi libraries, so that's
<fine, but if you try this macro on a pre-ansi cpp it'll recurse forever...

I've used similar constructs on a number of pre-ansi preprocessors, and
it worked fine (it did not recurse). When I implemented a preprocessor,
years before ansi, I made the mistake of it recursing. This was fixed
quickly...