On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, guy keren wrote: > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, Orna Agmon wrote: > > > Valgrind is not always correct. It sometimes reports errors which do not > > exists - they have no reason to exist and other memory checkers (such as > > third) do not find them. > > that, ofcourse, is no proof - the other checker might be too limited, or > have a bug, causing it not to find something that valgrind found. lets not > be too absolute here.
This happens, too, but I learned to tell the difference, at least on my program. When valgrind claims that the 17th item of an array is uninitialized, this means the problem is somewhere else. When valgrind gives reasonable warnings, and the other checker does not - valgrind is correct. (according to my experience, at least) Orna. -- Orna Agmon http://haifux.org/~ladypine/ ICQ: 348759096 ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
