The C Standard says the following about malloc(0):
If the size of the space requested is zero, the behavior is
implementation-defined: either a null pointer is returned, or the
behavior is as if the size were some nonzero value, except that the
returned pointer shall not be used to access
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 11:44:23AM -0400, Pat Lashley wrote:
> No, our implementation is NOT legal. We always return the SAME value. To
> be legal, we should not return that value again unless it has been
> free()-ed.
It is legal due to brain damaged definition of implementatio
I went wandering through the C Working Group archives for the heck of
it, and apparently a lot of people were confused over this, thinking
either as you did or that "unique" meant it would a value unique to
the usage of malloc(0). It's been clarified recently (and will be in
the next revision of
> No, sir. Operator precedence: assign first, and then compare, thus the
> comparison will always be true (else you'd be comparing to undefined
> values, which isn't any better). You might as well write:
>
> foo = malloc(0);
> /* make noise */
Ok, just for having it done:
if (foo == (
--On Tuesday, September 16, 2003 09:07:15 +0100 Matthew Seaman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 04:16:31AM +0800, maillist bsd wrote:
I am just testing jail on my FreeBSD4.8-stable box, i found i can not
ssh to the jail environment, but i can telnet to jail environment, the
ssh
--On Saturday, June 22, 2002 02:36:44 PM +0200 Neil Blakey-Milner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is always the option
>> to use SSL, which is my preference, but unfortunately neither SSL nor
>> SASL have widespread IMAP client support yet.
>
> Most IMAP clients I know of support SSL. Outl
6 matches
Mail list logo
