From:	Edward Hill <ha AT nochance DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: A Structured Problem ?
Date:	Wed, 21 Jul 1999 16:04:51 +0100
Organization:	GEC-Marconi
Lines:	25
Message-ID:	<3795E193.4AAD506E@nochance.com>
References:	<7mv0te$gq2$1 AT news6 DOT svr DOT pol DOT co DOT uk> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 96 DOT 990719090429 DOT 29235A-100000 AT silver DOT cs DOT umanitoba DOT ca> <7n09p0$9db$1 AT news5 DOT svr DOT pol DOT co DOT uk> <7n1c6l$14s$1 AT taliesin DOT netcom DOT net DOT uk> <379450DC DOT E0B363B5 AT nochance DOT com> <3795CD8F DOT 191A8C0E AT americasm01 DOT nt DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	pc02372.gmsws.gecm.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

"Campbell, Rolf [SKY:1U32:EXCH]" wrote:
> 
> Edward Hill wrote:
> 
> > It's good practice not to cast, malloc doesn't require a cast and a cast
> > can sometimes mask errors.
> 
>     How can casting mask an error?  And why doesn't malloc need a cast?

Under ANSI/ISO Standard C, casting the return from malloc is not
necessary,
and in fact modern practice discourages it, since it can
camouflage important warnings which would otherwise be generated
if malloc() happened not to be declared correctly; 

An example would be not having #include <stdlib.h> if malloc isn't cast
it would give you a compiler warning telling you your assigning a
pointer
from an integer, the default return value. If you cast the return from
malloc
you will silence this warning.

Ed

- Raw text -