This also applies to PetscFree()
On Feb 15, 2011, at 4:47 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > > In MPI one calls MPI_Comm_free(&comm) to allow the MPI implementation to set > the pointer explicitly to 0 after the object is destroyed. > > In Petsc XXXDestroy() does not pass the pointer (because it seemed too > unnatural to me in 1994) thus not allowing 0ing the pointer. > > Was this a bad design decision? Should it be revisited? > > Barry > > Two use cases > > 1) error detection when someone tries to reuse a freed object > > 2) when removing some objects from a data structure that will be used data > one currently needs to do > > XXXXDestroy(mystruct->something);CHKERRQ(ierr); mystruct->something = 0; > > instead of the cleaner XXXDestroy(&mystruct->something);CHKERRQ(ierr);
