Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!udel!princeton!phoenix!mjschmel From: mjschmel@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Michael J. Schmelzer) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: free() Message-ID: <2846@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Date: 10 May 88 18:03:53 GMT References: <2843@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <27780@cca.CCA.COM> Reply-To: mjschmel@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Michael J. Schmelzer) Organization: Princeton University, NJ Lines: 27 Keywords: free malloc alloc In article <27780@cca.CCA.COM> g-rh@CCA.CCA.COM.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes: > Er, I hope that 'compiler' was a slip. In case it wasn't, the It was. Forgive my lack of precision. I meant 'library' or something. > Free and malloc are implementation dependent -- they are >independent library routines. The quality of implementations vary. >There are a lot of rather cheesy implementations out there. So I shouldn't make any assumptions, in other words. That's exactly what I wanted to know. I mean, nobody actually uses K&R's source code for their implementation, do they? >allocators keep track of every block allocated and check whether an >address passed to it via free is actually an allocated block. In a >lot of implementations the control information for the block is placed >just before the block So in other words, my free() routine has a lot more info than just an address, right? Thanks again, everyone! My adviser calls me a "C wizard," let's just not tell him the truth, OK? -- "Sum Iuppiter Optimus Maximus!!"- My Latin teacher who flipped. "Worthlessness is the root of all worthlessness." -WPRB music dept. Mike Schmelzer mjschmel@phoenix!princeton.edu DISLAIMER:If you think I speak for anyone but myself, you must be a lawyer.