What is the correct usage of realloc() when it fails and returns NULL?

问题

Can anyone summarize what is the correct usage of realloc()?

What do you do when realloc() fails?

From what I have seen so far, it seems that if realloc() fails, you have to free() old pointer. Is that true?

Here is an example:

   1.  char *ptr = malloc(sizeof(*ptr) * 50);
   2.  ...
   3.  char *new_ptr = realloc(ptr, sizeof(*new_ptr) * 60);
   4.  if (!new_ptr) {
   5.      free(ptr);
   6.      return NULL;
   7.  }

Suppose realloc() fails on line 3. Am I doing the right thing on line 5 by free()ing ptr?

回答1:

From http://www.c-faq.com/malloc/realloc.html

If realloc cannot find enough space at all, it returns a null pointer, and leaves the previous region allocated.

Therefore you would indeed need to free the previously allocated memory still.

回答2:

It depends on what you want to do. When realloc fails, what is it you want to do: free the old block or keep it alive and unchanged? If you want to free it, then free it.

Keep in mind also, that in C89/90 if you make a realloc request with zero target size, realloc function may return a null pointer even though the original memory was successfully deallocated. This was a defect in C89/90, since there was no way to tell the success from failure on null return.

In C99 this defect was fixed and the strict relationship between null return and success/failure of reallocation was guaranteed. In C99 null return always means total failure of realloc.

回答3:

If realloc fails I don't think you would want to delete the original block since you will lose it. It seems like realloc will resize the old block (or return a pointer to a new location) and on success will return a pointer to the old block (or new location) and on failure will return NULL. If it couldn't allocate a new block the old block is untouched.

回答4:

Edit: Correction, some people are bashing me for what I said, the way you allocated your pointer seems to be best practice among them, I was taught to always go with type casts in the sizeof(), but apparently your way is more correct, so disregard what I said =)

Taking a peek at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malloc#realloc before might have done you some good.

You don't quite understand sizeof() - it has the value of the size of the argument you pass to it in bytes. For example, sizeof(int) will be 4 on most 32 bit systems but you should still use sizeof(int) instead of 4 because compiling your code on a 64 bit system (just as an example) will make that value equal to 8 and your code will still compile fine. What are you allocating memory for? Pointers? If so you should use sizeof(void*) instead (you can say sizeof(int*) but it's common convention not to mention to the compiler what you want to store at those pointers, since all pointers should be the same size - so most programmers say sizeof(void*)), if you need space for characters use sizeof(char) and so on.

You are however right to store the return value of realloc() in a new pointer and check it, though a lot of programmers will assume the system always has enough memory and get away with it.

来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3331221/what-is-the-correct-usage-of-realloc-when-it-fails-and-returns-null

标签

memory

realloc