On Sunday, July 25, 2010 17:18:02 Chet Ramey wrote: > On 7/25/10 2:36 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > why do you need to use those function names ? using a name spaced > > function like rl_malloc or _rl_malloc would keep the same functionality > > without clashing with other people. > > No, it wouldn't. It would not allow, for instance, an application to > control all the memory allocation and management readline performs.
why not ? the symbols would still be exported and overridable by end users. it would simply be using a namespace already reserved for readline. > > "xmalloc" is a pretty common name for people to > > use in their own projects and i dont think people even realize that > > readline is doing this. i know i wasnt aware of it and have used > > readline along with xmalloc in my application before. > > Exactly. You can override readline's use of xmalloc easily -- almost > without effort. except i dont want that behavior -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
