This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?

From: Richard Henderson <rth at twiddle dot net>
To: Wolfram Gloger <wmglo at dent dot med dot uni-muenchen dot de>
Cc: richard dot guenther at gmail dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 09:08:38 -0700
Subject: Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
References: <20070714160016.GA7949@lucon.org> <84fc9c000707151252g285e45bbpcf52992c88d45428@mail.gmail.com> <20070716143939.11249.qmail@md.dent.med.uni-muenchen.de> <20070716232320.GA15363@twiddle.net> <20070717095330.30832.qmail@md.dent.med.uni-muenchen.de>

On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:53:30AM -0000, Wolfram Gloger wrote:
> Surely you agree that in my second example, "*p = 0" _cannot_ be moved
> after the call to destroy_something_and_allocate_anotherthing(p)?

It can't be moved after, but it could be removed entirely as dead code.

I don't think we have a pass that will do that presently, but I see no
reason why it couldn't happen some day, more or less automatically, with
a pass that analyzes lifetimes of dynamic allocations.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
  - From: Richard Guenther

References:
- Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
  - From: Wolfram Gloger
- Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
  - From: Wolfram Gloger

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]