Is replacing alloca(3) where possible a good thing to do?

[Cedric Blancher]

Who was the "principal Illumos developer"? I remember some heated
discussions, mostly rooted in 'we stick with ANSI C' and because the
CTF/dwarf tools in Illumos were unable to handle VLA and no one was
interested in fixing the BUGS in their toolchain, so the cheapest
solution was done: VLA was declared persona non grata. Saves company
money.

Typical Sun policy which was one of the reasons which sealed the
downfall of Sun Microsystems.

But this is NO ARGUMENT for FreeBSD...

Ced


On 14 September 2016 at 16:48, Pedro Giffuni <pfg at freebsd.org> wrote:
> FWIW,
>
> After some discussion with one of the principal Illumos developers it is
> clear that they won't accept replacing alloca(3) for the sake of
> "portability". You also can't always replace alloca(3) with VLAs anyways.
>
> Pedro.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"



-- 
Cedric Blancher <cedric.blancher at gmail.com>
[https://plus.google.com/u/0/+CedricBlancher/]
Institute Pasteur