On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, kevin lyda wrote:
> no, that's not the same idea. first it allocates chunks of the same size.
> second, it returns a pointer. i just want to know the memory is now
> reserved,
and this is different from allocated memory in what way?
why not malloc your upper bound, realloc it down to final known size
later?
> however glibc functions that call malloc still need to be checked.
> plus, malloc is already managing memory, why duplicate that code?
cause you'd still have to manage what memory you reserved, and whether
you should unreserve it or not, no?
> kevin
--paulj
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
