This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: alloca is bad?

To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
Subject: Re: alloca is bad?
From: Chris Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:16:51 -0500
Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
References: <20001109212032.A26464@redhat.com> <200011101039.FAA29788@indy.delorie.com>
Reply-To: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 05:39:29AM -0500, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 21:20:32 -0500
>> From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
>> 
>> I was surprised by this assertion and so I thought I'd ask for a
>> consensus here.  Should the use of alloca be deprecated in gdb?
>
>In my experience, there's nothing wrong with alloca as long as it is
>used for allocating small buffers.  The only consideration is that not
>every platform supports alloca.

But, since alloca is already entrenched in gdb and available in liberty
I don't think this is an issue, is it?

cgf

Follow-Ups:
- Re: alloca is bad?
  - From: Fernando Nasser
- Re: alloca is bad?
  - From: Eli Zaretskii
- Re: alloca is bad?
  - From: Andrew Cagney

References:
- alloca is bad?
  - From: Christopher Faylor
- Re: alloca is bad?
  - From: Eli Zaretskii

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]