This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: egcs-19980531, warning patches [part 1/2]
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>
- Subject: Re: egcs-19980531, warning patches [part 1/2]
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 00:33:12 -0600
- cc: martin dot kahlert at mchp dot siemens dot de, ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu, egcs at cygnus dot com
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <199806061909.MAA23927@atrus.synopsys.com>you write:
>
> > Note that while calloc may be ANSI and available on systems as
> > far back as the pdp11 era, it may not be available on embedded targets.
>
> I would be amazed if there is an embedded target for which malloc is
> available and calloc is not.
Including kernels for embedded targets? Hell, unix kernels for
that matter.
[law@fast /sys] nm /vmunix | grep malloc
000374e8 T malloc
000393b0 T mmalloc
00041040 T rmalloc
0012c8fc D rx_mallocedC
0012c8f8 D rx_mallocedP
[law@fast /sys] nm /vmunix | grep calloc
[law@fast /sys]
I've gotten numerous complaints over the years about the number
of routines that users/developers need to provide to build kernels,
or code for embedded systems. Hell, I've done some complaining
myself as a former kernel developer.
It just seems silly to add yet another routine that has to be
provided for embedded systems or kernels just to eliminate a
warning in libgcc2.
jeff