Re: [ZEND-ENGINE-CVS] cvs: ZendEngine2 / zend_execute_API.c

Yeah, I think Sterling has a point. At 09:49 AM 7/19/2004 -0700, Sterling Hughes wrote:

I agree... malloc(0) is a valid construct, which is why i was kinda surprised. ateotd (*), this should be fixed in the leak reporter... -sterling (*) at the end of the day On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 07:33:24 -0700, Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> wrote: Got to run for a few hours. Where is the message in our sources? I think it's better to save that if() in the executor because it's highly unlikely that you don't have to allocate those Ts (except for empty functions which we don't care about, right? Andi At 03:28 PM 7/19/2004 +0100, Wez Furlong wrote:

Well, it seems like a waste. Checking for 0 args is much more friendly than invoking the allocator and asserting whatever mutex is required to get a memory block that consists solely of the block header and no useful content. If you think its acceptable, then please update the memory manager not to emit warnings about it :) --Wez. On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 07:17:44 -0700, Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> wrote:

Is this actually a problem? I thought malloc(0) works? Andi

-- Zend Engine CVS Mailing List (http://cvs.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php