X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Message-ID:	<3C84C626.7E259569@yahoo.com>
Date:	Tue, 05 Mar 2002 08:20:38 -0500
From:	CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
Organization:	Ched Research
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Malloc/free DJGPP code
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1020305101637 DOT 18873A AT is>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, CBFalconer wrote:
> 
> > > Features such as those in malldbg.c cannot be implemented that way, since
> > > they are meant to be used by ordinary users, not source code hackers.
> > >
> > > For example, how do you implement a feature that shows a report of
> > > allocated and free blocks?
> >
> > See my other posting a few minutes ago.  The free blocks can
> > ALWAYS be traced.
> 
> That was just an example.  A hook is more general than any specific code,
> because it allows a programmer to implement many features that the
> original author never had in mind.

Nothing prevents you implementing a hook.  You have lost nothing
compared to the present methods, but have gained the ability to
see inside the system, with a minimum of danger.  In fact existing
hook implementations that intercept malloc etc. calls and record
parameters and return values should continue to work unchanged. 
The only exception is where they make unclean assumptions about
internal structure, which they can now find automatically and
correctly.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com) (cbfalconer AT XXXXworldnet DOT att DOT net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   (Remove "XXXX" from reply address. yahoo works unmodified)
   mailto:uce AT ftc DOT gov  (for spambots to harvest)

- Raw text -