Groups > comp.lang.c > #12054

Re: Competing criteria

From	Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Competing criteria
Date	2011-10-24 22:39 +0200
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<o0vgn8-fb3.ln1@voyager.wichi.de.vu> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <j7vcpl$qe5$1@news.albasani.net> <j7vfkc$goj$1@dont-email.me> <j811ct$b5f$1@dont-email.me> <j8140s$qlk$1@dont-email.me> <bfd2f700-6c31-4ad3-af87-8bb2f2c40912@q13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 23.10.2011 15:24, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Oct 23, 3:15 pm, Richard Damon <news.x.richardda...@xoxy.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> if the task has a suitable alternative that it
>> can fall back on if the malloc returns no buffer,
>>
> People discuss this quite a bit. Technically it's often possible to
> use a less memory-hungry algorithm if malloc() fails. However it's
> almost never done in real code, because it means programs become much
> more difficult to write and to test.

It also means to write more code, some of which is almost never going to
get used... I mean, it would be like writing a program so that it runs
both on systems with an FPU and without: You basically have to write it
twice. It is almost always simpler to just say "Buy an FPU!" or "Buy
more RAM or enlarge the swap file!"

> --

The correct separator would be dash-dash-space-newline, you are missing
the space.

HTH,
Markus

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