On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:22:13PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
David Edmondson <dme@sun.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 04:38:00PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
I interpret "wrappers", above, to mean more than just a calloc-like wrapper.
A malloc (not calloc, of course) wrapper that always initializes can mask what would have otherwise been a used-uninitialised error, and what would still be a logical U.I. error.
And did that only in special compilation mode.
That seems silly. If the wrapper is defined as zero-initalising then it cannot be an error to assume that it zero-initalises.
What seems silly? A malloc() wrapper that initializes the memory it allocates? That's the case in which errors can be masked. A function intended to be used as a malloc or realloc replacement should not initialize its memory -- at least not by default. A calloc-wrapper _must_ do that. Not the others.
Before jumping on this and creating a out of scope thread out of a passing remark, please check the source of what I was comparing to and why in context. The purpose has never been to have a memory wrapper initialize the memory all the time. References: http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-xmlmemory.html http://xmlsoft.org/xmlmem.html#Debugging If you want to debate this I rather suggest to do this on libxml2 mailing list since this was never the intent on libvirt. http://xmlsoft.org/bugs.html thanks, Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ veillard@redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/