On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 14:59 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
I propose the following solution:
1. replace all calls to MyCalloc() with calls to calloc()
2. replace all calls to MyMalloc() with calls to malloc()
3. replace all calls to MyRealloc() with calls to realloc()
4. replace all calls to
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 16:58 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
If you use (or intend to use) lib dmalloc with PCB you will find the
following useful.
I've uploaded a patch against current heaad to sourceforge, ID
#3129279, described as follows:
Looks useful, I will push it, however, please explain
On Monday 06 Dec 2010 13:31:09 Peter Clifton wrote:
I did loose some respect for the dmalloc author(s) when I noticed on
their page they can't spell Microsoft Windows correctly. Windoze
In general, valgrind (probably not even conceived of when dmalloc was
first written), is a much more
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Peter Clifton pc...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 16:58 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
If you use (or intend to use) lib dmalloc with PCB you will find the
following useful.
I've uploaded a patch against current heaad to sourceforge, ID
#3129279,
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 10:04 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
Dropping the (a) ? (a) : 1 foolishness would be cleaner, but could
expose latent bugs in the 71 callers of the mymem allocators.
I'm happy to proceed either way. What is your preference ?
Let me push a big patch nuking the My* allocation
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 00:48 +, Peter Clifton wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 10:04 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
Dropping the (a) ? (a) : 1 foolishness would be cleaner, but could
expose latent bugs in the 71 callers of the mymem allocators.
I'm happy to proceed either way. What is your
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Peter Clifton pc...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 10:04 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
Dropping the (a) ? (a) : 1 foolishness would be cleaner, but could
expose latent bugs in the 71 callers of the mymem allocators.
I'm happy to proceed either way. What
On 07/12/10 11:55, Peter Clifton wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 00:48 +, Peter Clifton wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 10:04 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
Dropping the (a) ? (a) : 1 foolishness would be cleaner, but could
expose latent bugs in the 71 callers of the mymem allocators.
I'm happy to
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 11:58 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Peter Clifton pc...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 10:04 +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote:
Dropping the (a) ? (a) : 1 foolishness would be cleaner, but could
expose latent bugs in the 71 callers of
I count 54 locations in head that call MyStrdup()
A run time check of calls to MyStrdup() shows:
create.c:197 made 0 NULL calls, 48 good calls
create.c:219 made 0 NULL calls, 32 good calls
create.c:238 made 0 NULL calls, 1 good calls
create.c:240 made 0 NULL calls, 1 good calls
create.c:286 made
So calls with a NULL pointer are rare, but there are at least 3
callers that require tolerance of it.
I wouldn't call 3% rare. Uncommon, perhaps, but given who those three
callers are, it's far more significant than mere numbers show.
___
I propose the following solution:
1. replace all calls to MyCalloc() with calls to calloc()
2. replace all calls to MyMalloc() with calls to malloc()
3. replace all calls to MyRealloc() with calls to realloc()
4. replace all calls to SaveFree() with calls to free()
5. retain the MYFREE() macro as
5. retain the MYFREE() macro as its pointer clearing side effect is required
8. Instead of simply retaining MYFREE(p) (point 5), we could replace
each use of it with an explicit:
free(p);
p = NULL;
Is this MY prefix actually in the code?
Most sane places call the kind of free your'e
Is this MY prefix actually in the code?
It's free software, you could just look at the code yourself.
Yes, the MY prefix is used in pcb, otherwise why would we be talking
about it?
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 3:06 PM, timecop time...@gmail.com wrote:
5. retain the MYFREE() macro as its pointer clearing side effect is required
8. Instead of simply retaining MYFREE(p) (point 5), we could replace
each use of it with an explicit:
free(p);
p = NULL;
Is this MY prefix actually
If you use (or intend to use) lib dmalloc with PCB you will find the
following useful.
I've uploaded a patch against current heaad to sourceforge, ID
#3129279, described as follows:
PCB supports the use of the dmalloc library as a configuration option.
This patch makes the PCB source code more
16 matches
Mail list logo
