From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Feb 24 12:57:11 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from guild.plethora.net (guild.plethora.net [205.166.146.8])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 488D137B401
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:57:05 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from seebs@guild.plethora.net)
Received: from guild.plethora.net (seebs@localhost.plethora.net [127.0.0.1])
	by guild.plethora.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f1OKus618979
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:56:57 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <200102242056.f1OKus618979@guild.plethora.net>
From: seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach)
Reply-To: seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach)
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Setting memory allocators for library functions. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 24 Feb 2001 21:48:27 +0100."
             <9469.983047707@critter> 
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:56:54 -0600
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In message <9469.983047707@critter>, Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
>The guarantee is "If malloc returns NULL there is no memory you can use".

No, it's "if the memory is not available, malloc returns NULL".

>That doesn't mean that just because != NULL is returned that memory
>will in fact be available.

Sure, and access to stdin can segfault too.  If we want a decent quality of
implementation for C, malloc can't lie.

-s

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message