On 3/15/21 3:53 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 15/03/2021 15.25, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Mahmoud, it's generally a good idea to cc: people who commented on a
>> previous iteration of the same patch. In this case, Thomas. I'm doing
>> that for you now.
>>
>> Mahmoud Mandour writes:
>>
>>> On Mon
On 15/03/2021 15.25, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Mahmoud, it's generally a good idea to cc: people who commented on a
previous iteration of the same patch. In this case, Thomas. I'm doing
that for you now.
Mahmoud Mandour writes:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 1:13 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
wrote:
Mahmoud, it's generally a good idea to cc: people who commented on a
previous iteration of the same patch. In this case, Thomas. I'm doing
that for you now.
Mahmoud Mandour writes:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 1:13 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mahmoud,
>>
>> On 3/15/21 11:58 AM, Ma
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 1:13 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
wrote:
> Hi Mahmoud,
>
> On 3/15/21 11:58 AM, Mahmoud Mandour wrote:
> > Replaced a call to malloc() and its respective call to free()
> > with g_malloc() and g_free().
> >
> > g_malloc() is preferred more than g_try_* functions, which
> > re
Hi Mahmoud,
On 3/15/21 11:58 AM, Mahmoud Mandour wrote:
> Replaced a call to malloc() and its respective call to free()
> with g_malloc() and g_free().
>
> g_malloc() is preferred more than g_try_* functions, which
> return NULL on error, when the size of the requested
> allocation is small. Thi
Replaced a call to malloc() and its respective call to free()
with g_malloc() and g_free().
g_malloc() is preferred more than g_try_* functions, which
return NULL on error, when the size of the requested
allocation is small. This is because allocating few
bytes should not be a problem in a health
