Mark D. Baushke wrote:
> > static inline char *
> > xstrcat (size_t argcount, va_list args)
> > {
> > char *result;
>
> ...elided...
>
> > /* Allocate and fill the result string. */
> > result = (char *) xmalloc (totalsize + 1);
>
> Why is the cast needed? I was under the impression that GNULIB was using
> C89 semantics which should mean that
>
> result = xmalloc (totalsize + 1);
>
> is all that is needed because 'void *xmalloc (size_t s);' should be the
> prototype and a 'void *' function should not need a cast.
The cast is not needed if
1. you write ANSI C or ISO C code, and
2. you are willing to rethink the code in depth each time you modify it.
I use the cast because
1. I try to write code that is both valid ANSI C and C++ (this helps a lot
in the Cygwin and mingw ports, due to the brokenness of shared libraries
on that platform).
2. When I manipulate code, I often use "correctness preserving
transformations".
For example:
<type> result = <initializer>;
return <expression>(result);
where <expression> does not refer to result, can be transformed into
return <expression>(<initializer>);
Not so any more if you omit the casts:
char *result = xmalloc (totalsize + 1);
return result + 1;
is valid C code, but
return xmalloc (totalsize + 1) + 1;
is not.
The less you have to think when manipulating some code, the better.
Bruno
