delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
From: | sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) |
Message-Id: | <10205170333.AA15841@clio.rice.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Malloc/free DJGPP code |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Date: | Thu, 16 May 2002 22:33:38 -0500 (CDT) |
In-Reply-To: | <3CE41EB8.619484D9@yahoo.com> from "CBFalconer" at May 16, 2002 05:03:52 PM |
X-Mailer: | ELM [version 2.5 PL2] |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> It should be totally unnecessary, because the malloc code is the > only access to sbrk provided in the whole system (barring emacs). sbrk() is a fairly standard unix API used to control memory. Many programs use it when they want control over memory with lower overhead than malloc(). Almost no unix applications call it with a negative argument, since any library routine which did a malloc (or sbrk) could still be expecting memory beyond what you just contracted with a negative argument. However, if you use the unixy sbrk() flag, I believe you should get unix API compatible behavior, even with negative increments. > However I see no sbrk documentation as to what is valid/invalid etc. Documentation can frequently be improved as far as small details. But in this case it pretty much does what you ask it to, per the info pages. It's a low level routine, with no safety. And the DJGPP documentation is more clear and precise on what it does than either of the two commercial unix man pages I just checked ...
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |