Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site prism.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!bbnccv!prism!matt
From: matt@prism.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Recoding Lisp programs in C
Message-ID: <5400016@prism.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 12-Oct-85 05:01:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: prism.5400016
Posted: Sat Oct 12 05:01:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Oct-85 00:27:06 EDT
References: <324@bcsaic.UUCP>
Lines: 25
Nf-ID: #R:bcsaic:-32400:prism:5400016:000:1280
Nf-From: prism!matt    Oct 12 05:01:00 1985


/* Written 12:58 pm  Oct  7, 1985 by richw@ada-uts in prism:net.lang.c */
> 
> What about having the C version be conscientious about using "malloc"
> AND "free"?  Though many people I know feel that dynamic storage
> allocation is a "detail" that programmers need never worry much about,
> I wonder if making sure to "free" anything you "malloc" is all that
> hard.
> 
> Has anyone out there REALLY used "free"?  I'm very curious about this...

Ask anyone who has ever developed a piece of commercial code for a small
machine.  (Yes, Virginia, there are people who develop applications for IBM
PC's...)  I, for example, am currently working on a product that will operate
on potentially megabytes of data, and must run in 256 to 512 K of physical
memory, with no help from virtual memory.  You'd better believe we're careful
to match every malloc with an appropriate free!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Matt Landau      	   ARPA: matt%mirror@cca
 Mirror Systems, Inc.	   UUCP: {decvax!cca, ima!inmet, mit-eddie, wjh12}...
 Cambridge, MA						   ...mirror!prism!matt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blessed are they that run around in circles, for they shall be known as wheels.