Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Interesting.

As a very minor point, calling free(NULL) is well-defined and safe so there is no need for the if-statement in memory_close(). This is very clearly stated in the manual page [1] for instance:

If ptr is a null pointer, no action shall occur.

[1]: https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/free.3p.html



> calling free(NULL) is well-defined and safe

Probably showing my age. SunOS 4, PalmOS, and 3BSD reputedly crashed. (There were also double free exploits back in 1996.)

This further illustrates my point, though: Removing the NULL check is a single conditional to remove, as opposed to littering the free + guard everywhere. In effect, by isolating duplicated pieces of logic, it keeps possibilities open.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: