Re: xmalloc.c's xcalloc performs unnecessary test for N*S overflow

Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > How about the following (also untested) patch? > > 2005-06-17 Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * xmalloc (HAVE_GNU_CALLOC): New macro. > (xcalloc): Omit needless tests if ! HAVE_GNU_CALLOC. Looks fine to me. Thanks! __

Re: xmalloc.c's xcalloc performs unnecessary test for N*S overflow

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This makes me think it'd be worthwhile to support a new section in > the modules file listing `Recommended' modules. Yes, that would be nice. It's been suggested before but nobody has had the time yet to do it. gnulib-tool might bring in recommended mo

Re: xmalloc.c's xcalloc performs unnecessary test for N*S overflow

Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> As it stands, if I use both of the xalloc and calloc modules, >> calling xcalloc ends up performing the overflow check twice, >> first in xcalloc itself (above), and then again in calloc. > > Also, xcalloc conta