This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/2] manual/memory.texi: Document aligned_alloc.
- From: Will Newton <will dot newton at linaro dot org>
- To: Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>
- Cc: libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Patch Tracking <patches at linaro dot org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 17:37:59 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] manual/memory.texi: Document aligned_alloc.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <527A6F4E dot 4020006 at linaro dot org> <527A95D5 dot 2060604 at cs dot ucla dot edu> <CANu=DmiyupjQqKYf4pzxR4xd5PwNUV+Gqgtv8N8SNV94F56CSw at mail dot gmail dot com> <527BC886 dot 3090202 at cs dot ucla dot edu>
On 7 November 2013 17:06, Paul Eggert <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 11/07/2013 12:33 AM, Will Newton wrote:
>> The majority of
>> code out there seems to be using posix_memalign and it is not
>> deprecated (i.e. it remains in currently applicable standards).
>> aligned_alloc seems pretty much unused AFAICT.
> This is mainly because posix_memalign has been there for
> years and aligned_alloc is new. The newer interface is clearly better,
> and the documentation shouldn't recommend the worse interface.
True, but the question of which is "better" also involves which is
more portable to currently deployed systems IMO, and I do not have a
feel for whether aligned_alloc is actually out there and usable on a
wide variety of systems. C11 is only a couple of years old and only in
the last few years have we seen a widespread push to use C99 idioms
and even now there are projects that avoid C99.
Toolchain Working Group, Linaro