i want know how to remove non use memory location

[ragumrt]

after the c compilation & run ,the memory allocation still there, how can i remove that not useful memory address ?any idea or soft available ??
pls help me ?

[redhead]

When you're done using the memory that you've created with malloc(), calloc(), realloc(), etc.. You use free() to tell the system you're done using the memory.

[ragumrt]

Originally Posted by redhead

When you're done using the memory that you've created with malloc(), calloc(), realloc(), etc.. You use free() to tell the system you're done using the memory.

my code like

#include<stdio.h>

int main()
{
int count;
scanf("%d",&count);

retun 0;
}

after the compilation ,that memory address have null character, that is not use full for computer ,so i want remove that type not use full memory location


eg:- count variable create 2 bytes this is not use after the compilation

i think now is clear question and also cleary undear stand

[toe_cutter]

What are you using to compile? It shouldn't malloc any memory until the program is run, and then once it is finished running it will release it. You are not mallocing any memory, so you don't need to worry about freeing it. There should be no issues with your code.

[redhead]

What toe_cutter says is correct.

Are you talking about the Assembly code for it ??
Where essentialy it is using two instructions more than nessessary ??
ie:

main:
        pushl   %ebp
        movl    %esp, %ebp
        subl    $24, %esp
        andl    $-16, %esp
        movl    $0, %eax
        subl    %eax, %esp
        leal    -4(%ebp), %eax
        movl    %eax, 4(%esp)
        movl    $.LC0, (%esp)
        call    scanf
        movl    $0, %eax
        leave
        ret

As oppose to:

main:
        pushl   %ebp
        movl    %esp, %ebp
        subl    $24, %esp
        andl    $-16, %esp
        leal    -4(%ebp), %edx
        movl    %edx, 4(%esp)
        movl    $.LC0, (%esp)
        call    scanf
        movl    %ebp, %esp
        xorl    %eax, %eax
        popl    %ebp
        ret

Because, then it's just a matter of compiler optimization..
Else you can write your own compiler, if you'd think it can be done even smarter.