Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!COTTRELL@BRL.ARPA, JAMES
From: COTTRELL@BRL.ARPA, JAMES
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Naughty naughts
Message-ID: <521@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 8-Aug-85 15:01:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.521
Posted: Thu Aug  8 15:01:43 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 11-Aug-85 06:05:42 EDT
Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA
Lines: 16

/* Doug Gwyn once wrote:
> By the way, I would discourage using calloc() unless you are allocating
> an array of (char)s and want them to all be NUL bytes.  Since calloc()
> cannot guess how you are intending to use the storage it allocates,
> it is unable to fill it with the "right" type of 0 data.  You will
> normally be better off using malloc() and initializing the storage
> yourself.

Huh? What other kind of zero is there? Don't mention weird beasts like
`tagged architectures' cuz then why would the arrays of chars be tagged
right? Or do the quotes around `right' mean to ignore the whole message?
I am no great fan of calloc over malloc however.

	jim		cottrell@nbs
*/
------