Article View: comp.std.c
Article #5796Re: realloc
From: Andrew Hume
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1989 05:31
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1989 05:31
6 lines
792 bytes
792 bytes
gregg townsend reminds us of the pANS ``feature'' that malloc(0) returns NULL. can anyone provide the (or any) justification of this pointless stupid definition? i just love the idea that an initialised pointer is SOMETIMES indistinguishable from an uninitialised pointer.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<9122@alice.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!andrewReferences:
<10170@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <10032@ihlpb.ATT.COM> <9974@megaron.arizona.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!andrew From: andrew@alice.UUCP (Andrew Hume) Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: realloc Summary: justification reqested Message-ID: <9122@alice.UUCP> Date: 31 Mar 89 05:31:06 GMT References: <10170@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <10032@ihlpb.ATT.COM> <9974@megaron.arizona.edu> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ Lines: 6