i'm not suggesting to remove SDCC support or whatever. my proposal is the opposite. always use the conservative prototype.
There are a hieararchy of standards governing NuttX interfaces. The POSIX/ANSII/IEEE standard for a a Unix system as defined at OpenGroup.org. And you are right, mallinfo is not specified there.
But the second level of standards supported by NuttX are the Linux definitions. It does have a Linux Standards Base (LSB), although its control is sloppy and permissive. The form of mallinfo() is defined by that Linux specification as you can see with 'man mallinfo'
I agree that it is a poorly designed interface, but I think it is required in its current form by the LSB. Changing the function signature would certainly introduce very real compatibility issues and what what purpose? For you personal preference? That is not a sufficient reason.
