[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251101010309.GT1827@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 21:03:09 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: Thorsten Glaser <tg@...bsd.de>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer@...il.com>,
Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@...hat.com>,
Thiago Macieira <thiago@...ieira.org>
Subject: Re: realloci(): A realloc() variant that works in-place
On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 12:16:39PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Alejandro Colomar dixit:
>
> >A discussion within the C++ std-proposals@ mailing list triggered the
> >discussion about the need for a realloc() variant that works in-place,
> >that is, that doesn't move the address of the memory, and thus that
> >doesn't invalidate existing pointers derived from it.
>
> How is that supposed to work if you want to grow the
> allocation?
>
> This seems like increasing burden on the implementation
> for everyone, just for niche corner use cases.
Asymptotically, in-place realloc never works.
Rich
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.
