> No, sir. Operator precedence: assign first, and then compare, thus the
> comparison will always be true (else you'd be comparing to undefined
> values, which isn't any better). You might as well write:
>
> foo = malloc(0);
> /* make noise */
Ok, just for having it done:
if (foo == (
I went wandering through the C Working Group archives for the heck of
it, and apparently a lot of people were confused over this, thinking
either as you did or that "unique" meant it would a value unique to
the usage of malloc(0). It's been clarified recently (and will be in
the next revision of
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 11:44:23AM -0400, Pat Lashley wrote:
> No, our implementation is NOT legal. We always return the SAME value. To
> be legal, we should not return that value again unless it has been
> free()-ed.
It is legal due to brain damaged definition of implementatio
The C Standard says the following about malloc(0):
If the size of the space requested is zero, the behavior is
implementation-defined: either a null pointer is returned, or the
behavior is as if the size were some nonzero value, except that the
returned pointer shall not be used to access
--On Tuesday, September 16, 2003 09:07:15 +0100 Matthew Seaman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 04:16:31AM +0800, maillist bsd wrote:
I am just testing jail on my FreeBSD4.8-stable box, i found i can not
ssh to the jail environment, but i can telnet to jail environment, the
ssh
--On Saturday, June 22, 2002 02:36:44 PM +0200 Neil Blakey-Milner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is always the option
>> to use SSL, which is my preference, but unfortunately neither SSL nor
>> SASL have widespread IMAP client support yet.
>
> Most IMAP clients I know of support SSL. Outl
6 matches
Mail list logo
