Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!columbia!rutgers!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!hplabs!hpcea!hpsrla!hpsrlc!darrylo
From: darrylo@hpsrlc.HP.COM (Darryl Okahata)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Microsoft C 4.0 large models
Message-ID: <3320043@hpsrlc.HP.COM>
Date: Tue, 4-Aug-87 11:40:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: hpsrlc.3320043
Posted: Tue Aug  4 11:40:27 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Aug-87 00:40:03 EDT
References: <3225@cucca.columbia.edu>
Organization: Network Measurements Div - Santa Rosa, CA
Lines: 22

In comp.sys.ibm.pc, davis@bdmrrr.bdm.com (Arthur Davis x4675) writes:

> If you have moved your code to a large model, I hope you have changed
> your malloc calls to _fmalloc (and free to _ffree).  You can get some
> strange results using malloc in a far environment.  One result you won't
> get is the compiler message "Oh gosh, you really shouldn't use malloc in
> a large model".  Not to start an argument with anyone, but it is for
> reasons such as these that I love 68000-family architectures.  Good luck.
> ----------

     As long as you stick with using only one memory model (and include the
proper <.h> files), you can use malloc() without any problems.  It's only when
you start mixing models (like mixing the small and large models) that large
monsters reach up and bite various sensitive parts of one's body :-).

     -- Darryl Okahata
	{hplabs!hpcea!, hpfcla!} hpsrla!darrylo
	CompuServe: 75206,3074

Disclaimer: the above is the author's personal opinion and is not the
opinion or policy of his employer or of the little green men that
have been following him all day.