Hello,
Andy Wingo writes:
> Actually scm_gc_malloc will give you back a zeroed array, afaik, as
> GC_malloc does. The patch looks fine but if we can rely on
> scm_gc_malloc's new behavior, we don't need the memset at all.
Oh oh, good catch! It’s actually documented this way in
gcinterface.html
Hi Julian,
On Sun 25 Oct 2009 18:16, Julian Graham writes:
> --- a/libguile/gc-malloc.c
> +++ b/libguile/gc-malloc.c
> @@ -206,7 +206,8 @@ void *
> scm_gc_calloc (size_t size, const char *what)
> {
>void *ptr = scm_gc_malloc (size, what);
> - memset (ptr, 0x0, size);
> + if (size)
> +
Applied, thanks!
Ludo'.
Hi all,
I've been fixing and reverting this locally for the past month or so,
and I'm not sure if anyone else has seen this, but it looks like
there's some static analysis code that's been added to GCC 4.3.3 that
warns about code paths that could produce a call to `memset' with a
size parameter of
