From: "Tom St Denis" <tomstdenis AT yahoo DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
References: <Pine DOT SOL DOT 4 DOT 33 DOT 0107022250120 DOT 27631-100000 AT holyrood DOT ed DOT ac DOT uk>
Subject: Re: malloc() problem, DJDEV 203
Lines: 18
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.0000
Message-ID: <K9607.79554$Mf5.22089651@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 22:00:10 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.112.8.23
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT home DOT net
X-Trace: news3.rdc1.on.home.com 994111210 24.112.8.23 (Mon, 02 Jul 2001 15:00:10 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 15:00:10 PDT
Organization: Excite AT Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com


"Daniel Barker" <sokal AT holyrood DOT ed DOT ac DOT uk> wrote in message
news:Pine DOT SOL DOT 4 DOT 33 DOT 0107022250120 DOT 27631-100000 AT holyrood DOT ed DOT ac DOT uk...
> Unless I have been staring at the screen too long, there is a bug in DJGPP
> malloc(). malloc() does not indicate failure when a very large allocation
> is attempted.
>
> I noticed this whilst checking a test I have written for my own malloc()
> wrapper function. malloc() does not indicate failure for a very large
> allocation.
>
> Here's a small example, tested with DJDEV 203 and gcc2952.

Confirmed with "gcc version 2.95.3 20010315/djgpp (release)" as well.

Tom