Messages in this thread | | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: malloc(1/0) ?? | Date | 8 Nov 2000 14:11:34 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011080149010.32613-100000@server.serve.me.nl> By author: Igmar Palsenberg <maillist@chello.nl> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > > The program does not work. A program works if it does what it's supposed to > > do. If you want to argue that this program is supposed to print "ffffff" > > then explain to me why the 'malloc' contains a zero in parenthesis. > > > > The program can't possibly work because it invokes undefined behavior. It > > is impossible to determine what a program that invokes undefined behavior is > > 'supposed to do'. > > May I remind you guys that a malloc(0) is equal to a free(). There is no > way that any mem get's malloced. >
Where the heck did you get idea?
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |