On 01/12/2013 09:26 AM, Sascha Cunz wrote: > Am Freitag, 11. Januar 2013, 23:07:25 schrieb Shaw Andy: >>> [...] >>> >>>> Microsoft in the past has also said that you should keep the >>>> -MD(d)/-MT(d) >>>> setting consistent so it is the same across all libraries and >>>> applications, >>> [...] >>> >>> Which is cool, if you can manage it. But it's far from what happens in the >>> real world. >>> >>> In the real world you have foreign libraries to load, doesn't matter if >>> these are stock libraries provided from Microsoft, from 3rd parties or >>> even yourself. It is not uncommon to have all kinds of memory managers >>> mixed in one >>> application (some windows libraries still use MSVC6's runtime as dll). >> [snip] >> >> Granted it is tricky to ensure it happens in the real world, but we are in >> the position to ensure that we do in fact do the right thing in this case >> then shouldn't we actually do so? > In my book, the right thing to do is - as Thiago said - to ensure that memmory > allocated by library X is also freed by library X. Everything other, including > the play-safe recommendation from Microsoft above, looks like a workaround to > me. > > An additional reasoning comes to mind: If one ever wanted to use a memory > profiler that is not a virtual-machine (like valgrind) or does dependency > injecting but depends on code-augmentation, you won't have any luck getting > this setup unless you compile all 3rd party provided code with that > augmentation, too.
debug_new, anyone? > > Sascha > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development