Hi Wilco, On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 06:07:06PM +0000, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > In principle a realloc that shrinks a non-NULL block does never need to fail. > If it can't shrink the current block (either because internal design means it > can't make it any smaller or because it doesn't have memory for a new > smaller block) then it should preferably return the original pointer instead > of returning NULL and taking the failure path. > > So I'm wondering whether we should more clearly specify this - whenever > it's possible to not fail, don't return NULL?
As Rich Felker said, musl has very good reasons for failing, several of them. Look at his comments in the thread. Have a lovely day! Alex -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
