https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19164
--- Comment #9 from Stanislav Blinov <stanislav.bli...@gmail.com> --- It's like we're talking about different things... `malloc` returning null is *insufficient* to warrant program termination, no matter how you want to call the wrapper. As for that: > They can know by opening std.internal.memory and looking at what > `enforceMalloc` does. If they don't know then they should not use it! No. Just hard no. From your own documentation: ``` Pure variants of C's memory allocation functions `malloc`, `calloc`, and `realloc` that achieve purity by aborting the program on failure so they never visibly change errno. ``` null result is not a failure when malloc's argument was 0. So either the documentation is wrong, or the implementation is wrong. --
