Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #11985

Re: Competing criteria

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/22/2011 6:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> [...]
> The rule I always use is a task is not allowed to fail, then it can't
> call on anything that might fail. malloc, in general, has the
> possibility to fail so needs to be avoided in tasks that can not fail.

     You may be using "fail" too broadly.  Yes, malloc() can "fail" in
the sense that it reserves no memory.  But malloc() does not then abort
the program or something equally drastic; it returns NULL to inform the
caller of the outcome and allow the caller to take action as appropriate
in the context.  If the caller (and the caller's callers) cannot proceed
without the reserved memory, perhaps the program will then "fail" -- but
this is not an inevitable outcome when malloc() "fails."

     If getenv("FAILURE_OPTION") returns NULL, is that a "failure?"

     If strchr(string, '?') returns NULL, is that a "failure?"

     If fopen("nonsuch.txt", "r") returns NULL, is that a "failure?"

     Depending on the structure and needs of the program, the answers
could be any combination of "Yes," "No," and "It's complicated."  The
same goes for malloc().

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Competing criteria nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-21 14:49 -0700
  Re: Competing criteria Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-10-21 22:16 +0000
    Re: Competing criteria Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2011-10-22 14:06 -0400
      Re: Competing criteria Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-22 16:47 -0400
        Re: Competing criteria Ark <akhasin@macroexpressions.com> - 2011-10-22 17:33 -0400
          Re: Competing criteria Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-22 18:20 -0400
            Re: Competing criteria Ark <akhasin@macroexpressions.com> - 2011-10-22 21:29 -0400
            Re: Competing criteria "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-10-23 10:32 +0200
              Re: Competing criteria "Joachim Schmitz" <nospam.jojo@schmitz-digital.de> - 2011-10-23 11:06 +0200
                Re: Competing criteria Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-10-23 09:09 +0000
                Re: Competing criteria "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-10-23 12:04 +0200
                Re: Competing criteria "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-10-27 08:44 +0200
                Re: Competing criteria Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-23 05:01 -0700
            Re: Competing criteria Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-10-23 08:29 -0400
              Re: Competing criteria Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-23 09:15 -0400
                Re: Competing criteria Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-23 06:24 -0700
                Re: Competing criteria Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net> - 2011-10-24 22:39 +0200
                Re: Competing criteria Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-10-24 17:10 -0700
                Re: Competing criteria Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-10-25 13:09 +0300
                Re: Competing criteria Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-26 00:23 -0700
      Re: Competing criteria Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-10-23 00:02 +0300
      Re: Competing criteria Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-10-24 20:10 +0000
        Re: Competing criteria Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-24 19:36 -0400
        Re: Competing criteria nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-25 10:07 -0700
          Re: Competing criteria Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-25 16:51 -0400
  Re: Competing criteria John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-10-21 22:37 +0000
  Re: Competing criteria Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-21 20:42 -0400

csiph-web