From 6331855845987660608
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1149ec,f5b50f79e3b33c8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1149ec,public
X-Google-Thread: f78e5,c0143c56db298752
X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-10 04:36:48 PST
Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.std.c++
Path: nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!swrinde!pipex!logica.co.uk!carmen.logica.co.uk!mcook
From: mcook@lna.logica.com (Michael Cook)
Subject: Re: malloc calls FROM the standard library (was: Re: Question on 5.2.3.)
In-Reply-To: rfg@netcom.com's message of 06 Sep 1994 05:47:27 -0400
Message-ID: <MCOOK.94Sep9104817@galaga.lna.logica.com>
Sender: news@carmen.logica.co.uk (News Manager Account)
Nntp-Posting-Host: 158.234.144.189
Reply-To: michaelc@lna.logica.com
Organization: Logica North America
References: <MHP1.94Sep1112739@Ra.msstate.edu> <1994Sep2.102654.14783@ida.liu.se>
	<CvIH4L.8G2@crdnns.crd.ge.com> <rfgCvpCJ4.I3F@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 14:48:17 GMT
Lines: 15
Xref: nntp.gmd.de comp.std.c:7842 comp.std.c++:8915

>>>>> "rfg" == Ronald F Guilmette <rfg@netcom.com> writes:

    rfg> In article <CvIH4L.8G2@crdnns.crd.ge.com> volpe@ausable.crd.ge.com writes:

    rfg> It's my understanding that nothing provided by the implementation is
    rfg> supposed to call malloc.  (At least that is the rule in ANSI/ISO C,
    rfg> I believe.  I'm less sure about draft standard C++.)  In other words,
    rfg> user's should be able to replace `malloc' which their own routine of
    rfg> the same name.

What would be the point of such a restriction?  If a library were to call
`malloc' directly, why would that preclude someone from replacing `malloc'
with their own implementation?

Michael.