Xref: utzoo comp.std.c:1006 comp.lang.c:17404
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: ? (was: realloc)
Message-ID: <9976@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 4 Apr 89 08:13:10 GMT
References: <10170@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <10032@ihlpb.ATT.COM> <934@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> <9132@alice.UUCP> <4801@ingr.com>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 13

In article <4801@ingr.com> crossgl@ingr.UUCP (Gordon Cross) writes:
>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...

Sure it does.  malloc() returns a null pointer when there is no more
memory.  You can build whatever additional mechanism you want on top
of this; X3J11 was considerate enough not to decide for you what this
should be.

However, I don't think that has anything to do with Andrew's complaint.