Xref: utzoo comp.std.c:1004 comp.lang.c:17396
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!ingr!crossgl
From: crossgl@ingr.com (Gordon Cross)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: realloc
Message-ID: <4801@ingr.com>
Date: 3 Apr 89 14:46:16 GMT
References: <10170@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <10032@ihlpb.ATT.COM> <934@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> <9132@alice.UUCP>
Reply-To: crossgl@ingr.UUCP (Gordon Cross)
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Lines: 17

In article <9132@alice.UUCP> andrew@alice.UUCP (Andrew Hume) writes:
>
>	malloc(n) returning 0 is, to me, an error condition. that is,
>i should pack up and go home. (of course i check malloc's return value).
>But now, thanks to pANS, i first have to check if n==0. this is a pain
>in the butt.

Yes, it is.  I've always wanted behavior similiar to an "out-of-memory"
signal that I could trap to let me know when there is no more memory.  So
much so in fact, I wrote my own malloc that lets me set things up to have
a function called whenever an out-of-memory condition occurs.  Regrettably
to the best of my knowlegde, the pANS does not address this issue...
-- 

Gordon Cross             UUCP:      uunet!ingr!crossgl     "all opinions are
111 Westminister Way     INTERNET:  crossgl@ingr.com        mine and not those
Madison, AL 35758        MA BELL:   (205) 772-7842          of my employer."