Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Joy of this, Joy of that
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2024 21:36:59 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <vi5f1r$3k9sn$6@dont-email.me>
References: <vhigot$1uakf$1@dont-email.me>
	<6iKdnTQOKNh6AqD6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com>
	<20241120081039.00006d2a@gmail.com> <vhlium$93kn$1@dont-email.me>
	<vhmprp$iaf1$1@dont-email.me> <lq9h4kF2tegU1@mid.individual.net>
	<vhpmo6$14s79$1@dont-email.me> <wwva5drk0m1.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
	<vhptgf$1614q$1@dont-email.me> <Iq40P.70904$EQue.62359@fx13.iad>
	<slrnvk1qft.5gg9.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
	<mcf0P.211278$pZ%.68099@fx16.iad> <vhs153$1k6ft$3@dont-email.me>
	<wwvjzcu1chd.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <vhtide$1s5d5$8@dont-email.me>
	<wwvmshodcjt.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <vi01qi$2cic3$1@dont-email.me>
	<wwvmshnlmhm.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <vi2rat$318ah$4@dont-email.me>
	<wwviksav1i7.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <vi5e6t$3k9sn$1@dont-email.me>
	<wwved2x1y57.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2024 22:36:59 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="884e8e3d13bad04345a336fccab9cba8";
	logging-data="3811223"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+1bfXix8Xt5zLgqjoYCnYB"
User-Agent: Pan/0.161 (Chasiv Yar; )
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aIbTSwhH9oJ4MzbEvlWfwunW168=
Bytes: 2373

On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 21:30:12 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
> 
>> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 08:32:32 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>
>>>> The examples show that freeing the same pointer twice can be detected
>>>> reliably.
>>> 
>>> They do no such thing.
>>
>>    free(p);
>>    printf("%s(): returned from first free() call\n", __func__);
>>
>>    free(p);
>>    printf("%s(): returned from second free() call\n", __func__);
>>
>> Is that or is that not freeing the same pointer twice?
> 
> Obviously you are not arguing in good faith.

Is this some special meaning of “they do no such thing” that is private to 
you?