On 05.05.2014 22:28, David Chisnall wrote: > On 5 May 2014, at 18:42, Andrey Chernov <a...@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> Please don't commit OpenBSD errors. Now you mix calloc() with the >> realloc() for the same variable later which makes calloc() zeroing >> pointless and waste of CPU. > > The purpose of calloc() here is not (primarily) to get the zero'd size, it's > to get the overflow-checking behaviour for calloc.
It is better to avoid using undocumented intrinsic knowledge of standard function particular implementation, this is unportable at least and hard to understand too. Moreover, choosing some standard function just due to its arcane side effect is semantically incorrect. If you need bounds checking, you can either making it transparent from the library code point of view (preferred) or use literal visible methods (pragma, online function, etc). > The uses of realloc() later do still potentially overflow, as they follow the > realloc(pointer, size * sizeof(type)) antipattern. The code can become completely mess if not follows simple strategies above. -- http://ache.vniz.net/ _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
