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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #41595

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

Show all headers | View raw

partremmaps@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, March 10, 2014 5:43:18 AM UTC-7, Martin Shobe wrote:

(snip)
>> 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." 

(snip)

> But, the question that I am asking is whether free is allowed to 
> not deallocate memory. The person who prompted me to ask this 
> question in the first place claimed that because the program in 
> question could not, using only the semantics of the C Abstract 
> machine, determine whether free() had done anything, and therefore, 
> free() need not do anything, even if it meant a massive memory 
> leak on a program which did appropriately call free() for all 
> memory it allocated.

and the standard leaves the amount of available memory up to the
implementation, and often on whatever else the machine is doing
at the time.
 
> I have two issues with saying that deallocation can be delayed. 
> One is that the standard says that all side effects must be 
> completed before the last sequence point of a full expression.
> Thus, for the side effect of free to be delayed seems outside 
> of the standard.

As far as I know, that is for side effects visible to the program.

Note that printf() has the side effect of printing something somewhere,
such as a terminal or line printer, but that effect usually happens
much later, if ever. 
 
> Secondly, the standard does say that free() makes the space 
> available for further allocation. However, if the implementation 
> for example delayed freeing until it ran out of memory then freed 
> on demand, (Android style LOL) then, for all practical purposes, 
> all calls to free() would have the same effect as if free had 
> fully freed within its own sequence points.
 
> However, I do not see the letter or the spirit of the standard 
> allowing free() to have a delayed effect. Obviously, malloc() is 
> not allowed to postpone its creation of an object otherwise 
> immediate use of that object would be bad. 

Seems that many systems now have lazy allocation, also known as
overcommit, where malloc() never returns NULL. Similar to the way
airlines overbook expecting some no-shows, lazy allocation assumes
that you malloc() more than you really need. 

> allocating and deallocating are the same class of side effects.

On many systems, the available memory depends on what other programs
are using, so the side effects of malloc() and free() are, to some
extent, outside the control of the program. Seems to me that makes
them different.

-- glen

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

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