Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!aplcomm!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!aiai!richard
From: richard@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: scope of malloc
Message-ID: <3729@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 9 Nov 90 16:09:31 GMT
References: <1791@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au> <1990Nov07.134942.7355@virtech.uucp> <1990Nov7.234315.15508@athena.mit.edu>
Reply-To: richard@aiai.UUCP (Richard Tobin)
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 16

In article <1990Nov7.234315.15508@athena.mit.edu> scs@adam.mit.edu (Steve Summit) writes:
 [alloca]

>Correction: "If you just want the pointer to be around during the
>function and you want the program to be unportable..."

Where unportable means "portable to an extremely large class of
machines and compilers".  Portability is always a compromise.  You
have the choice of rejecting machines or compilers with such serious
deficiencies as making alloca() impossible.

-- Richard
-- 
Richard Tobin,                       JANET: R.Tobin@uk.ac.ed             
AI Applications Institute,           ARPA:  R.Tobin%uk.ac.ed@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Edinburgh University.                UUCP:  ...!ukc!ed.ac.uk!R.Tobin