![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a72b48700a3db1f3d059d6e2e5637417.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
30 Jun
2009
30 Jun
'09
7:20 p.m.
How about making CFFI:FOREIGN-ALLOC always return a null pointer regardless of what malloc() would do? Would that work? Yes; this is fine with me. I was just thinking one could prevent testing for :count 0 by allowing the same return value as malloc() and thus not introduce an overhead.