Re: [PATCH][stage1] Remove conditionals around free()

[Iain Sandoe <idsandoe@googlemail.com>]

> On 3 Mar 2023, at 23:11, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> On 2 March 2023 02:23:10 CET, Jerry D <jvdelisle2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/1/23 4:07 PM, Steve Kargl via Fortran wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 10:28:56PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran wrote:
>>>>  libgfortran/caf/single.c     |    6 ++----
>>>>  libgfortran/io/async.c       |    6 ++----
>>>>  libgfortran/io/format.c      |    3 +--
>>>>  libgfortran/io/transfer.c    |    6 ++----
>>>>  libgfortran/io/unix.c        |    3 +--
>>> 
>>> The Fortran ones are OK.
>>> 
>> 
>> The only question I have: Is free posix compliant on all platforms?
>> 
>> For example ming64 or mac?

OSX / macOS are [certified] Posix compliant - but to unix03 (and might be missing features declared as optional at that revision, or features from later Posix versions).

In the case of free() man says:
"The free() function deallocates the memory allocation pointed to by ptr. If ptr is a NULL pointer, no operation is performed.”

Iain


>>  It seems sometimes we run into things like this once in a while.
> 
> I think we have the -liberty to cater even for non compliant systems either way, if you please excuse the pun. That's not an excuse on POSIX systems, imho.
> 
>> 
>> Otherwise I have no issue at all.  It is a lot cleaner.
>> 
>> Jerry