Paul Eggert wrote: > On 08/09/10 09:25, Bruno Haible wrote: > >> The contents of the 'allocated' buffer is scratch, therefore malloc + free >> should be faster than realloc... >> >> Also, the '3 * (lena + lenb)' guess is pessimistic; it is possible that >> it may return with ENOMEM when in fact strxfrm's real needs would not >> lead to ENOMEM. > > Thanks again; I installed this: > > * src/sort.c (compare_random): Use free/xmalloc rather than > xrealloc, since the old buffer contents need not be preserved. > Also, don't fail if the guessed-sized malloc fails. Suggested by > Bruno Haible.
This was resolved a year ago.
