Should GC.realloc(null, N) be the equivalent of GC.calloc or GC.malloc?

[safety0ff via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 23:51:03 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>
> However, this side question that need not be answered remains: 
> If I started with GC.calloc, shouldn't GC.realloc give me 
> memory that is cleared?

No, the GC doesn't track whether the memory was calloc'ed.

> Or at least don't I deserve a GC.recalloc()?
>

The only reasonable way to implement this would be to have calloc 
always zero the over-allocation.

It's also worth noting that there's no reqalloc, so any user 
implementation of recalloc will have to grab the gc lock twice.