From: Carsten H. (T. R. <ra...@ra...> - 2010-08-16 13:52:07
|
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:54:22 -0300 Lucas De Marchi <luc...@pr...> said: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Iván Briano (Sachiel) > <sac...@gm...> wrote: > > > > Why not just use calloc there? > > Because i've just finished a script to convert those cases to calloc > and I want to test :-D > > Lucas De Marchi most mallocs probably should be callocs.. EXCEPT for some cases. where its performance sensetive or perhaps huge allocations will happen and thus filling with 0 is "wasted" to the point of possibly measurable. -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... |