On 9/19/05, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I ran 2.4.x through valgrind and found two small problems on Linux > that have been fixed. There may be some other issues which could > benefit from more eyes (small, probably one time memory leaks). The > entire run is here: > > http://python.org/valgrind-2.4.2.out > > (I need to write a lot more suppression rules for gentoo.) > > I think I see a memory leak in win32_startfile. Since I don't run > windows I can't test it. > filepath should be allocated with the et flag to PyArgs_ParseTuple(), > but it wasn't freed without this patch. Does this make sense? See > the attached patch.
That patch doesn't make sense to me -- the "s" code to PyArg_ParseTuple doesn't return newly allocated memory, it just returns a pointer into a string object that is owned by the caller (really by the call machinery I suppose). Compare other places using PyArg_ParseTuple(args, "s:..."). -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
