Related articles |
---|
[7 earlier articles] |
Re: What's wrong with alloca() ? wicklund@intellistor.com (1991-12-30) |
Re: What's wrong with alloca() ? wws@renaissance.cray.com (1991-12-30) |
Re: What's wrong with alloca() ? jfc@athena.mit.edu (1991-12-31) |
Re: What's wrong with alloca() ? GORMAN_B@prime1.lancashire-poly.ac.uk (Barry Gorman) (1992-01-03) |
Re: What's wrong with alloca() ? rankin@eql.caltech.edu (1992-01-05) |
Re: What's wrong with alloca() ? pcg@aber.ac.uk (1992-01-05) |
Re: What's wrong with alloca() ? barmar@think.com (1992-01-06) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers,comp.unix.aix |
From: | barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) |
Keywords: | storage, design |
Organization: | Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA |
References: | 91-12-075 92-01-020 |
Date: | 6 Jan 1992 04:40:09 GMT |
In article 92-01-020 pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
> void withvector(proc,bytes)
> void (*proc)(/* char *, unsigned */);
> unsigned bytes;
> {
> char *vector = malloc(bytes);
> proc(vector,bytes);
> if (vector)
> free(vector);
> }
This implementation doesn't free the vector if proc exits via longjmp().
One of the advantages of stack allocation is that nothing special has to be
done to free the data. There's absolutely no way it can stick around when
you exit the stack frame by any means.
--
Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp.
barmar@think.com
{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.