Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:56:57 +0200 From: Markus Wichmann <nullplan@....net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: perhaps we should add re[c]allocarray? On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 04:18:35AM -0600, Ariadne Conill wrote: > Hello, > > reallocarray and recallocarray are BSD extensions that solve similar issues as > strlcpy/strlcat, but with array reallocations instead of strings. > > reallocarray itself is already part of glibc since 2.28. > > Unfortunately, while working on new ifupdown implementation for Alpine, I > wanted to use recallocarray because it is very helpful in terms of pushing new > strings to a string array (you will always maintain a NULL-terminated array, > and you don't have to worry about it) -- but I discovered musl still does not > have it. > > Anyway, I think it would be useful to include both functions in musl 1.2.1. > If everyone agrees, I'll make a patch. > > Ariadne > > Seems mostly useless to me. reallocarray() is equivalent to realloc(), multiplying the last two arguments. And recallocarray() does seem useful, but moreso as a subroutine. I see little reason to put this into a standard library. On a formal point of view, neither of these has been standardized. I can find an Oracle man page for reallocarray(), but not recallocarray(). Both are OpenBSD extensions. For glibc, I can find reallocarray() (which mostly wraps realloc()), but no recallocarray() (I checked in the most recent released version, which is 2.31 as of right now). It appears, reallocarray() enjoys more widespread adoption than recallocarray(). Both can, however, be easily found by a compile/link test. As stated above, however, the necessary functionality can easily be written in whatever application needs it, so I don't see the point. I've done that before; it is two lines if you manage your variables well. JM2C, Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.