Xref: utzoo comp.std.c:956 comp.lang.c:17290
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-winken!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!Tim_CDC_Roberts
From: Tim_CDC_Roberts@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: realloc
Message-ID: <16401@cup.portal.com>
Date: 29 Mar 89 20:12:54 GMT
References: <10170@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Distribution: na
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 13

In <10170@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>, scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit) writes:

> It is an apparently well-
> kept secret that realloc is supposed to behave gracefully at
> a slightly special-cased boundary point: when handed a NULL
> pointer and a nonzero size, it acts essentially as a malloc.

I am unable to locate any justification for this statement.  Is this
behavior actually defined anywhere, or is it just your wish that realloc
behave this way?

Tim_CDC_Roberts@cup.portal.com                | Control Data...
...!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!tim_cdc_roberts |   ...or it will control you.