Re: g_malloc overhead

[Maciej Piechotka <uzytkownik2 gmail com>]

Martín Vales <martin opengeomap org> writes:

> hi:
>
> I working with visual c++ in Windows and i find glib very useful for
> many C task, but i am worry about the g_malloc overhead.
>
> We really need a new malloc??
>
> gpointer
> g_malloc (gsize n_bytes)
> {
>  if (G_UNLIKELY (!g_mem_initialized))
>    g_mem_init_nomessage();
>  if (G_LIKELY (n_bytes))
>    {
>      gpointer mem;
>
>      mem = glib_mem_vtable.malloc (n_bytes);
>      if (mem)
>    return mem;
>
>      g_error ("%s: failed to allocate %"G_GSIZE_FORMAT" bytes",
>               G_STRLOC, n_bytes);
>    }
>
>  return NULL;
> }
>
>
>
>
>
> What are the advantages of use a glib_mem_vtable ???. I think we have
> the same malloc function in all operating systems?.
> static GMemVTable glib_mem_vtable = {
>  standard_malloc,
>  standard_realloc,
>  standard_free,
>  standard_calloc,
>  standard_try_malloc,
>  standard_try_realloc,
> };
>

g_malloc will abort program when no additional memory is avaible (as
usually programers do not care about handling it as it would require
usually... allocating memory).