Re: x*alloc optimizations

[Jim Meyering <meyering@ascend.com>]

Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com> writes:

|   In message < r2af8fzfwu.fsf@happy.cygnus.com >you write:
|   > law@cygnus.com (Jeffrey A Law) writes:
|   >
|   > > I quickly scanned your patch for any problems this creates, but didn't
|   > > find any.  However, we should probably fix xrealloc to avoid losing if
|   > > a zero sized request is made.
|   >
|   > But please fix this system dependent.  I.e., add a configure test for
|   > this non-ISO C behaviour and don't let normal systems do the same work
|   > twice (since their realloc implementation again checks for NULL).
| The amount of time saved by this optimization is likely to be so
| small that it's dwarfed by the time to write an autoconf test make
| sure it does the right thing, and get it checked in.  :-)
|
| IMHO, it's not worth the effort.

In case anyone decides to do this, you don't have to
write the autoconf tests;  I already did it for fileutils:

  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/fileutils-3.16n.tar.gz

see these files:

  lib/malloc.c
  lib/realloc.c
  m4/malloc.m4
  m4/realloc.m4

I don't know if it was worth the effort, but I'm happier :-)