From 2764059514203695307
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f78e5,c0143c56db298752
X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public
X-Google-Thread: 1149ec,f5b50f79e3b33c8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1149ec,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-12 17:14:03 PST
Path: nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!news.clark.edu!sun.lclark.edu!news.reed.edu!usenet.ee.pdx.edu!cs.uoregon.edu!sisters.cs.uoregon.edu!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!cse.ogi.edu!daniels
From: daniels@cse.ogi.edu (Scott David Daniels)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: malloc calls FROM the standard library (was: Re: Question on 5.2.3.)
Date: 12 Sep 1994 23:56:56 GMT
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR
Lines: 11
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <352ps8$j32@reuter.cse.ogi.edu>
References: <CvvDzK.2E8@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <1994Sep10.033223.23015@nlm.nih.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coho.cse.ogi.edu
Xref: nntp.gmd.de comp.std.c:7878 comp.std.c++:8957

[Roughly, why cannot a user write a malloc-replacement and still be in-standard]

Even worse, a user may choose to implement his ``malloc'' by calling ``calloc,''
blissfully unaware that the run-time implementor has chosen to build ``calloc''
by calling ``malloc'' for the storage and then clearing it.

In this case, the C system builder has used the standard interface to malloc,
and the user has provided a result, but none of this actually helps.

-Scott David Daniels
daniels@cse.ogi.edu