From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFA] utils.c: Fix xcalloc (0, 0) behavior
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 12:28:00 -0000
Message-id: <3AA3F64E.9F0302A5@cygnus.com>
References: <1010303075808.ZM24102@ocotillo.lan>
X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00078.html

Kevin Buettner wrote:
> 
> According to section 16.1 in Harbison & Steele, it is permissible for
> calloc(0,0) to return either NULL or an implementation defined unique
> pointer.  I've come across an implementation of calloc() which chooses
> to return NULL.

Does anyone know what the ISO-C standard has to say?  I think it would
be helpful if xcalloc() not only followed ISO-C but also did it in a
consistent way across platforms.

nice catch,

	Andrew