Re: xmmalloc?

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at ges dot redhat dot com>]

> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 03:55:14PM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
>
> > Does GDB currently use xmmalloc in any consistent way?  When writing
> > functions that might call xmalloc, should I try to write versions that
> > call xmmalloc instead and try to find an appropriate md to pass to
> > them?  If I don't do that but instead just use xmalloc, will anything
> > bad happen?  In particular, am I opening up myself to any new
> > possible memory leaks, other than the ones that are, of course, always
> > possible when calling xmalloc?
> >
> > Any background info on this would be appreciated.
>
> I get the distinct impression that uses of mmalloc have started to
> rot...
>
> If this is not the case, could someone please summarize the advantages? 
> Otherwise, should we just remove it entirely?
The offical line is that ``we're'' removing it entirely.  The ARI says 
``GDB is trying to eliminate the [x]mmalloc() family.'' so it must be 
true ... :-^

(No I don't remember exactly when this was discusssed.  Its' one of 
those things that was drummed into me from long long ago :-)

It would mean that GDB could no longer be compiled to pull the ``use 
mmap to save sections trick'' but I gather from the discussion (I don't 
remember) that this was acceptable.

Andrew