Tamas Rudnai wrote:
>> Of course you have to be careful when using dynamic memory allocation, 
>> but
>> you can't just assume that if you use it you will have memory leaks, 
>> memory
>> unbalancing problems, and "big and hardly recoverable problem". You don't
>> need malloc() to write buggy code.
>
> I agree with that. All I am saying is when the memory allocation mapping
> collapses youor entire system crashes, while if only a piece of memory is
> corrupted the system might survive.

I don't understand; why do you say that "entire system crashes"? It's not 
that difficult to handle "OUT OF MEMORY" cases, you can make the system fail 
gracefully.


> I think what Isaac meant is that if your application doesn't have enough
>> memory to do what it needs to do, you should get a chip with more RAM!
>
> It depends. If it saves more money on the development phase than the 
> smaller
> device would do on the production, then I agree with you on this.

The point is that you can run into the same problem ("out of memory") with 
static memory allocation. It's not a problem inherent to dynamic memory 
allocation.

Whether malloc() et al are available on the target system, is another 
matter.

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist