>>>>> On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:01:52 +0200, "H.Merijn Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> If it only returns the value from sbrk(), damn well call it sbrk.
> Ahh, someone on /my/ side.
Mee too.
> So far, all I got was criticism. I asked for it. But no-one said it was useful.
> (Or I didn't read between the lines enough).
Sure it looks useful to me, but I'm so happy when I do not have to
deal with that stuff that I hope I won't have to use it. But should I
ever have the need again (and you cannot anticipate when that happens)
I definitely will be happy to have it available.
> You, might know. Are there systems where the sbrk () value /decreases/ after
> mallocs? Top-down stacks and heaps a.o.t. bottom-up.
You know, my all-time-favorite manpage is on the NeXT computer, where
you *have* brk and sbrk, but they return just random data. And the
*full* manpage reads:
BRK(2) UNIX Programmer's Manual BRK(2)
NAME
brk, sbrk - change data segment size
The UNIX system calls brk and sbrk are not supported on the
NeXT computer.
:-)
--
andreas
