[vox-tech] malloc() is ... old school?

[Peter Jay Salzman]

begin Rod Roark <rod@sunsetsystems.com> 
> Stirring up some dust... my 1978 K&R mentions alloc() and
> calloc() but not malloc().  Then I have this 1985 "Advanced
> UNIX - A Programmer's Guide" which does talk about malloc().
 
wow -- my gut reaction was wrong!   okay, so there is some kind of basis
for that statement.  thanks, rod!

btw, is alloc() == alloca()?

> In 2003, I think malloc() is pretty safe.  :-)
 
heh.  i would think a prof would steer students to malloc() to avoid the
overhead of clearing memory if it's not necessary.

consider the dates you give, it still seems like a strange thing to
say...

pete


> -- Rod
> 
> On Wednesday 19 March 2003 06:08 pm, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> > i've heard this from two people now.
> >
> > some students are being taught they should stay clear of malloc() and
> > instead use calloc() because calloc() is the "old school" way of getting
> > memory dynamically.  they're taught that malloc() may not be present in
> > all implementations of the C library.  again, because calloc() is "old
> > school".  presumably, malloc() is ... new fangled.   ;)
> >
> > actually, both people used the words "old school", so i'm assuming
> > that's some kind of quote by the professor.
> >
> > just for my own self-edification, does anyone know anything about this
> > "old school" and "new school" business?  i've never heard of it before.
> >
> > pete
> 
> _______________________________________________
> vox-tech mailing list
> vox-tech@lists.lugod.org
> http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

-- 
Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D