Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: realloc() - frequency, conditions, or experiences about
 relocation?
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 18:31:48 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <v5d6m5$1769p$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v4ojs8$gvji$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4ov8h$j2q2$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v52270$2nli8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v54jac$3a4p2$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v5bbd3$rhao$2@dont-email.me> <875xtyu0kk.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <v5bluo$thpd$1@dont-email.me> <v5cbkn$11tla$1@dont-email.me>
 <QNieO.108090$ED9b.88071@fx11.iad> <87r0cmrpww.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 03:31:49 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a0475ea1831d78ec58c17d06517ed380";
	logging-data="1284409"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18CZ4XvHy799ZxGTFP8K4r7l6q2HdnLGPk="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bDVihlfwqa151mtvzA+7WvkErx8=
In-Reply-To: <87r0cmrpww.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2270

On 6/24/2024 2:28 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
> [...]
>>> Baby X has bbx_malloc() which is guaranteed never to return NULL, and
>>> never to return a pointer to an allocation which cannot be indexed by an
>>> int.
>>
>> What do you mean by 'indexed by an int'?  So, what happens if I index
>> your allocation with -109235?
>>
>> Or did you mean to say unsigned (or positive) int less than the
>> size of the allocation?
> 
> If I recall correctly, Malcolm hates size_t.  I presume that
> bbx_malloc() will never allocate more than INT_MAX bytes.
> 

He still has to deal with bbx_malloc failing. Don't like automatically 
aborting...

bbx_malloc(INT_MAX);
bbx_malloc(INT_MAX);
bbx_malloc(INT_MAX);
....

;^)