Oh I see. So maybe you should just call it safe_malloc() or it'll be too
confusing :)
At 06:28 AM 7/21/2004 +0900, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
On 2004/07/21, at 6:11, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Looks good but why not rename the function to _safe_pemalloc()? (And of
course rename to safe_pemalloc() as you
On 2004/07/21, at 6:11, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Looks good but why not rename the function to _safe_pemalloc()? (And
of course rename to safe_pemalloc() as you do later on.
Because it's there just for persistent allocation, while pemalloc() can
be used both ways.
Moriyoshi
--
PHP Internals - PHP Ru
Looks good but why not rename the function to _safe_pemalloc()? (And of
course rename to safe_pemalloc() as you do later on.
At 05:26 AM 7/21/2004 +0900, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
Here's the patch. I'm going to commit this soon.
Moriyoshi
Index: Zend/zend_alloc.c
==
Here's the patch. I'm going to commit this soon.
Moriyoshi
Index: Zend/zend_alloc.c
===
RCS file: /repository/ZendEngine2/zend_alloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.138
diff -u -r1.138 zend_alloc.c
--- Zend/zend_alloc.c 15 Jul 2004 22:59:5
At 16:26 20/07/2004, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
On 2004/07/20, at 14:10, Sara Golemon wrote:
Is there any reason there's no safe_pemalloc()?
I once had exactly the same thought. Probably because there'd be no need
for persistence, and stream folks now obviously need it :)
Yep, no special reason - let
On 2004/07/20, at 14:10, Sara Golemon wrote:
Is there any reason there's no safe_pemalloc()?
I once had exactly the same thought. Probably because there'd be no need
for persistence, and stream folks now obviously need it :)
Moriyoshi
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsub
Is there any reason there's no safe_pemalloc()?
-Sara
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
