Bernhard Voelker wrote: > On 09/14/2012 10:40 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Bernhard Voelker wrote: >>> Shouldn't we free(buf), too? >> >> Thanks. >> Yes, to placate leak-checking tools, but for the record, any time buf >> was allocated, we'd exit (successfully) right after return from that >> function. >> >> Hence, I've added the free guarded by IF_LINT: >> >> @@ -429,7 +429,7 @@ seq_fast (char const *a, char const *b) >> if (buf < z) >> fwrite (buf, z - buf, 1, stdout); >> >> + IF_LINT (free (buf)); >> } > > The other 2 calls to free() could then also be IF_LINT()ed.
No, because they would have an impact (albeit small) on the following code when seq_fast returns false.
