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 */ ------