GC.calloc

[Daniel Murphy]

"David" <d at dav1d.de> wrote in message news:ks6m33$o9b$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Why doesn't GC.calloc follow the function signature of stdc.calloc?
>
> calloc(num, size_per_element)
>
> I think this should be changed, if no reason speaks against it, I can
> look into changing this.
> Of course this will break backwards compatability, but I think this is
> worth it?

YES.  This is the memory corruption bug that I've been stuck on for the last 
week in the DDMD port.

Thankyou so much for bringing this up, otherwise I'd still be stuck.