From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: meillo@marmaro.de (markus schnalke)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 09:06:48 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] Did realloc ever zero the new memory?
In-Reply-To: <20150913011501.GF2103@mcvoy.com>
References: <201509130032.t8D0WvPl024634@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU>
 <20150913011501.GF2103@mcvoy.com>
Message-ID: <1Zb1NA-5he-00@marmaro.de>

[2015-09-12 18:15] Larry McVoy <lm at mcvoy.com>
> 
> That's a really good point.  Anyone like these?
> 
> void *alloc(size_t bytes);
> void *realloc(void *old, size_t want);
> 
> void *zalloc(size_t bytes);
> void *zealloc(void *old, size_t want);

Please note, that identifiers are usually remembered by sound
not by letter sequence. `zalloc' and `zealloc' are likely to
be pronounced similar and thus there is a good chance that
this leads to confusion and errors. Furthermore, `calloc' and
`zalloc' are prone to be pronounced equally or understood
equally, especially by non-native speakers.

Choosing good identifiers is a tough task.


meillo