Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Fatal Bug in VAX C pointer indirection
Message-ID: <5853@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 11-May-87 02:34:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.5853
Posted: Mon May 11 02:34:10 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 13-May-87 00:50:33 EDT
References: <582@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 14

In article <582@bsu-cs.UUCP> corwin@bsu-cs.UUCP (Paul Frommeyer) writes:
>... When malloc was called with more than
>3 levels of pointer indirection, why, it just crashed!
>...
>Digital might say this is a feature to keep programmers from using excessive
>indirection, but what pray tell is wrong with excessive indirection, 
>especially when it allows manipulation of many interconnected lists?

For Chrissakes, malloc()'s internals don't know how you plan to use the
value returned from malloc()!  Whatever bug there is is most likely in
your use of pointers.  Are you aware that in
	stuff->link1->link2->link3->link4->link5->link6 = malloc(...)
all of  stuff  through  stuff->...link5  must have been correctly set up by
you beforehand?  malloc() cannot possibly take care of your links for you.