Hello Ralf,
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Jim, all,
>
> on Tru64 4.0D I got this:
>
> | cc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DEXEEXT=\"\" -DEXEEXT=\"\" -DNO_XMALLOC -DEXEEXT=\"\"
> -I. -I.. -I../../dummy-0/gllib -I../intl -ieee -g -c -o realloc.o
> ../../dummy-0/gllib/realloc.c
> | cc: Error: ../../dummy-0/gllib/realloc.c, line 56: In this statement, a
> common type could not be determined for the 2nd and 3rd operands
> ("malloc(...)" and "realloc(...)") of a conditional operator. (badcondit)
> | result = (p == NULL ? malloc (n) : realloc (p, n));
> | ------------^
> | gmake[3]: *** [realloc.o] Error 1
>
> ... due to malloc being #defined
> but not restored like realloc in realloc.c, there is a type mismatch,
> as the rpl_malloc function is not declared.
Thanks for the analysis. Your patch does two things:
- You realized that when REALLOC_0_IS_NONNULL && ! MALLOC_0_IS_NONNULL
the code is wrong because it may malloc(0). A good point. Can you prepare
a fix for this that is independent from the other issue?
- It does weird #undef games to get the malloc() declaration from the system.
The problem is that malloc is already defined to rpl_malloc in config.h.
This idiom comes from the times when we did the function replacements in
config.h.
Now we normally do them in the appropriate header file substitute,
such as in stdlib.h. This has the advantage that we can first include the
original <stdlib.h>, to get malloc()'s original function declaration, and
then only we '#define malloc rpl_malloc' and provide a function declaration
for rpl_malloc.
The 'malloc-posix' module already uses this new idiom. Can you change the
'malloc' module to use the new idiom as well? This will fix this issue.
Bruno
