Thread: Why pfree(NULL) breaks execution?
C doesn't break on free(NULL) so why is pfree developed to break on NULL?<br />Is there any way in PostgreSQL to overcomethis so that it won't break, apart from checking if the pointer NULL?<br />
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Marios Vodas <mvodas@gmail.com> wrote: > C doesn't break on free(NULL) so why is pfree developed to break on NULL? > Is there any way in PostgreSQL to overcome this so that it won't break, > apart from checking if the pointer NULL? I think that free(NULL) works on some platforms but not all. I don't see what advantage we'd get out of making pfree(NULL) silently work, and there's a clear disadvantage: it would remove a useful sanity check. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 4 March 2011 14:50, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that free(NULL) works on some platforms but not all. I don't > see what advantage we'd get out of making pfree(NULL) silently work, > and there's a clear disadvantage: it would remove a useful sanity > check. I don't feel particularly strongly about what pfree() should do one way or the other, but that isn't so; free(NULL) works on all platforms, and is required to by the standard. -- Regards, Peter Geoghegan
Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com> writes: > On 4 March 2011 14:50, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think that free(NULL) works on some platforms but not all. �I don't >> see what advantage we'd get out of making pfree(NULL) silently work, >> and there's a clear disadvantage: it would remove a useful sanity >> check. > I don't feel particularly strongly about what pfree() should do one > way or the other, but that isn't so; free(NULL) works on all > platforms, and is required to by the standard. For the last few years it's been pretty safe to assume that, but it did not use to be so --- pre ISO C spec, some malloc libraries allowed free(NULL) and some didn't. In any case, this has been debated before and the project policy is that having pfree(NULL) throw an error is a net benefit. The main case where it's really useful to not throw an error is where malloc(0) returns NULL rather than a valid pointer (and BTW, both of those behaviors are allowed by spec). However, palloc(0) is guaranteed to give you a valid pointer that you can pfree, so that argument doesn't hold here. regards, tom lane