|
From: Madhu M. K. <mm...@ya...> - 2003-04-13 19:43:43
|
Nicholas Nethercote wrote: >> I have a feeling that some of the cases are due to propagation >> (copying/passing undefined vals up and down through various subroutine >> calls), but there are a ton of places that it looks like the code >> assumes things start as zero. > >Assuming malloc'd memory is zeroed is an easy mistake to make, since many >malloc() implementations do zero even though this isn't required. (Not >sure about glibc, though.) Could the confusion be thanks to the fact that globals/statics are set to 0; sometime in the history of the development, these variables moved into the fuction? ... Just a thought. Cheerio, M p.s. Julian, can we please set the Reply-To to the list email id by default? If one is not careful, the possibility of spamming you or Nicholas is non trivial.... Madhu M Kurup /* Nemo Me Impune Lacessit */ mmk at yahoo-inc dt com |