> > > I agree the risk is low, but if something _does_ blow up, it will do so subtly.
>
> Arguable the proposed badptr behavior is correct. It's basically "how many
> angels can dance on the head of a pin"? All the returned pointers are
> at least 0 bytes away from the previous one.
C++ very carefully keeps objects of zero size at differing addresses to
avoid exactly this kind of pointer confusion. Given the trivial fix is
simply
size += !size;
at the start of malloc what is there worth arguing about ?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
