Hello andrew,

Saturday March 13 2021, andrew clarke wrote to Michael Dukelsky:

 ac>>>> #define nfree(a) {if(a != NULL) {free(a); a = NULL;}}

 WV>>> And the test for NULL isn't necessary, because free() is by
 WV>>> definition doing nothing if the pointer passed to it is NULL.

 MD>> Yes, I know it. It was written long ago and not by me and I do
 MD>> not change it because I do not know whether free() always worked
 MD>> as it works now or it did not test the pointer for NULL in some
 MD>> ancient systems.

 ac> Wilfred is right, though I'd prefer nfree() was not used rather than
 ac> changing it.

 ac> Having a macro modify the variable passed to it just feels like bad
 ac> code to me.

There's a lot of bad code here.

 ac> But I will leave it.

So be it.

 ac> Incidentally I think the "oldest" compiler still supported (properly)
 ac> by HPT's build files is Open Watcom 2.0. The OW2.0 fork is an active
 ac> project but its WCL386 compiler is still only C95 compliant, as
 ac> evident from the internal __STDC_VERSION__ macro being set to 199409.

 ac> Though C95 is still newer than ISO/IEC 9899:1990, aka C89/C90.

Some persons emerge from time to time who want to build the sources for DOS. Or maybe that was in BINKD echo...

Michael

... node (at) f1042 (dot) ru
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707