Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty?

From	Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty?
Date	2014-03-10 07:43 -0500
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<lfkc18$eim$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<401aa474-05e6-4cf4-a3c2-5e2c2343157e@googlegroups.com> <09f7d573-218c-4653-8374-0395e639ae4b@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 3/10/2014 1:05 AM, partremmaps@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, March 8, 2014 10:08:24 PM UTC-8, partr...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
> The fact is that the standard says that free is to free the space pointed to, making it available to further allocation. It doesn't spell out that it has to happen right away or that it may do it later, but then again it doesn't spell out that all of the other functions have to do theirs right away either.
>
> However, it does fully support the concept that side effects happen and finish within sequence points.
>
> The technicality is that the standard says that modifying an object is a side effect, but it doesn't say that deleting an object is a side effect, and free deletes an object.
>
> However, malloc creates an object. But we certainly can't argue that malloc is allowed to create that object later - it must be ready BEFORE the ending sequence point for malloc() because otherwise the next statement might try to use unallocated memory.
>
> And even free() is to free space for further allocation -- what if the very next statement was to allocate memory, and that it needed the just freed memory? The purpose of the standard's wording is clear: free the memory so it can be re allocated. Period.
>
> To me, it seems that creating and deleting objects would also have to be considered of the same type of thing. Obviously, creating an object with malloc() must happen before malloc()'s last sequence point, so I see no reason to say that deleting an object with free() would be any different.
>
> It does not make sense to me to make any assumption on lack of details that renders useless clearly worded sections of the standard.
>
> The standard says that free does certain things. If it does not do those things in a given implementation, then it sure seems like it's not standard to me.

I don't think the question is, "Can free() not deallocate the memory." 
It clearly must. The question is, "Can free() be implemented as a 
no-op." Here, the answer is clearly "yes, as long as it works as if it 
had deallocated the memory." If that deallocation doesn't result in a 
requirement that a future malloc(), et. al., succeed, then the "real" 
deallocation can be put off indefinitely via the "as-if" rule.

Martin Shobe

Thread

Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-08 22:08 -0800
  Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-03-09 06:55 +0000
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-03-10 00:47 +0100
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-09 22:37 -0700
        Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-03-10 10:20 +0100
          Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-03-10 08:52 -0700
          Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-10 20:51 -0700
            Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-11 01:08 -0500
            Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-03-11 12:52 +0100
              Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-12 00:09 -0700
                Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-03-12 12:59 +0100
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-03-10 09:01 +0000
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> - 2014-03-10 15:56 +0000
  Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-09 01:11 -0800
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-03-09 12:39 +0000
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-03-09 13:05 +0000
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-09 22:28 -0700
        Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-10 07:27 -0500
          Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-10 20:55 -0700
            Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-11 08:19 -0500
              Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-11 23:22 -0700
                Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-12 08:09 -0500
                Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-03-12 11:29 -0400
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-10 07:29 -0500
  Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-09 09:14 +0000
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-10 15:33 -0500
  Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-09 23:05 -0700
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-10 07:43 -0500
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? gordonb.3qcze@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2014-03-10 12:05 -0500
        Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-10 20:16 -0700
        Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-29 16:27 -0700
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-10 21:48 -0700
        Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-11 05:52 +0000
  Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? partremmaps@gmail.com - 2014-03-20 19:14 -0700
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-03-21 03:25 +0000
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2014-03-21 20:58 -0400
        Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-29 16:11 -0700
          Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2014-03-29 22:27 -0400
            Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-30 13:18 -0700
              Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2014-03-30 20:49 -0400
                Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-04-17 10:52 -0700
            Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-03-31 11:18 -0400
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-21 03:31 +0000
    Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-29 15:39 -0700
      Re: Does ANSI C allow free() to always be empty? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-03-30 04:22 +0000

csiph-web