Message-ID: <3DB643C0.CB011389@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 02:37:52 -0400
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: CBFalconer's malloc
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1021023074033 DOT 13511A AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, CBFalconer wrote:
> 
> > I still have to go for the .h files, nor have I looked for
> > malloc.txh.
> 
> I'd really recommend to read malloc.txh before anything else, it
> will probably make many things clear.
> 
> > Another useful thing would be an example of a
> > debugging package using all this.
> 
> malldbg.c is such an example.
> 
... snip ...
> >
> > How is that different from an external intercept (see the sample
> > xmalloc call above)?  It is perfectly free to collect statistics
> > on the count of calls and the count of NULL returns.
> 
> Maybe it isn't, I don't know.  But the internal hooks are inherently
> more flexible since they can allow access to internal variables of
> the functions they hook.

Offhand I can't think of a single internal variable I would want
to expose, nor of any use for such exposure.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com) (cbfalconer AT worldnet DOT att DOT net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!