fair enough. for my part i don't like writing code that does nothing
(and i know nothing about windows or macintosh computers), but what
you're proposing sounds reasonable and not very intrusive.
there are already wrappers in darktable.h:
void *dt_alloc_align(size_t alignment, size_t size);
void
On 1/28/19 3:15 AM, johannes hanika wrote:
re: malloc() and 0: linux overcommits, i.e. it will likely never
return 0 even if your memory is all full. this means checking for 0 is
completely useless in this context.
To be blunt, that reads like a rationalization for writing bad software.
Return
johannes hanika (2019-Jan-28, excerpt):
> re: malloc() and 0: linux overcommits, i.e. it will likely never
> return 0 even if your memory is all full. this means checking for 0 is
> completely useless in this context.
Actually, Linux allows to disable overcommitment [1], and some admins
consider t
hi,
i agree that we should focus on code stability :)
re: malloc() and 0: linux overcommits, i.e. it will likely never
return 0 even if your memory is all full. this means checking for 0 is
completely useless in this context.
roman setup coverity scan for rawspeed in the past. i thought it was
a
