Jean-Sébastien Guay wrote:
Hi Cory,
I don't think anybody has questioned the design of OSG.
Yes, Neil has said that perhaps we should consider "restructuring" to
avoid the false positives. This comes down to changing the design.
I also agree with you that making code concessions to accommodate tools
is unfortunate, but it happens all the time.
Yes, the coding changes to accomodate tools. But the design will stay
the same. It's the implementation that changes. That's what I was
talking about.
On the other hand, I'd like to know if code that explicitly unloads
OSG would ever be accepted into the repository. I'm getting the sense
that it would be if it were sufficiently transparent, simple and
inexpensive.
Yes, Robert said in this thread that he would accept something that
unloads/unrefs all singletons / static objects, but it might be hard
to get to all singletons since some exist in the implementation files
only.
(btw, has anyone compiled valgrind for Windows?)
valgrind is Linux only.
I suspect it's not Linux-specific, but more gcc/g++ specific, and so
might be buildable on cygwin or mingw? If it is, then it might be
usable for Windows executables...
From http://valgrind.org/info/platforms.html:
"In particular Windows is not under consideration here because porting
to it would require so many changes it would almost be a separate project."
There have been people that have run their windows executable under wine
under valgrind (or should that be under valgrind under wine, hmmm :)).
Paul
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
