Speaking of ksh

[gwyn at brl-smoke.UUCP]

nKeywords:

In article <3870001 at hpcuhb.HP.COM> kluft at hpcuhb.HP.COM (Ian Kluft) writes:
>I've seen malloc() bomb many times on an AT&T 3B5 at CSU Chico when people
>used char [] and char * interchangeably across function calls.  These have
>been considered equivalent in all the C texts way back to K&R but, in reality,
>at least AT&T's C compiler cannot always swallow it.

Wait a doggone minute.  An array has NEVER been equivalent to a pointer.
The NAME of an array, when used in an expression, is (in MOST cases, but
not all) converted to a pointer to its initial member.

A FORMAL PARAMETER in a function definition written as char foo[]
is taken to be char *foo.  I have never seen an AT&T C compiler have
trouble with this, and I've seen a lot of AT&T C compilers.

>Why it affects malloc() we never exactly figured out.  But this has always
>fixed problems that sounded identical to what you just described.

If someone passed the address of a statically-allocated array to free(),
it could certainly cause a later malloc() to run amok.