On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Pär Karlsson <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks! > > It didn't even occur to me to check this out. My only excuse is gratuitous > consistency and lack of pure C experience; a malloc() without a > corresponding sizeof() seemed a little arbitrary to me, but it makes sense > now :-)
Well, I'm always happy to see someone being more careful than necessary, than the other direction. ;) -mjc
