On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 10:17:29AM +0900, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Vincent Torri <vincent.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > > is it normal that no check is done when calloc is called ? > > It's a good question. In E17, there isn't much handling of this > situation. I am wrong in assuming that on all unix supported by E17, > when it start returning NULL, it would be way to late ? > > Should we handle it ?
You should check for it and fail deterministically at least. Doing something like fprintf(stderr, "oops\n"), exit(1); is perfectly valid. When malloc and friends fail depends somewhat on the setup. Memory overcommit makes the returned error unreliable in the sense that you can later get killed by OOM. Using resource limits (ulimit -d / -v etc) can result in malloc errors much earlier, but whether you can do something sane from that depends on the circumstances. E.g. if the user wants to open an image and you can't allocate a buffer, it makes sense to report an error for that as the image and therefore the buffer can be huge. Joerg ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
