I implemented the changes you recommended and it works; everything seems to be in order now. I've implemented the same situation with plain xmlInitParser() and didn't see that "still reachable" data, which is the only reason I posted here. Now that I know that is "per-thread data", it makes a lot more sense. Valgrind doesn't complain anymore either, so my life is a lot happier. Thank you for your help and information.
Daniel, thank you, too, for your help. I put the offending code in a loop as you suggested, and when compiled against libxml with memory debug, all turns out well. Thank you for that hint. If I need help again, I will make to sure to do that; this is still a learning process for me. The example I posted is exactly the same as my own code, but I figured it would be best, though, if you didn't have to scroll through pages of comments and such. Is there any more information I can read about this "per-thread data"? I'd like to learn more. Thank you all for your help! Michael On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Andreas Stricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andreas Stricker wrote: >> You should first initialize the library, using the LIBXML_TEST_VERSION >> macro. Still don't forget to add xmlCleanupParser() at the very end: > > As noted by Daniel Veillard, this isn't a memory leak, just the per thread > data that exists exactly once per thread, don't grow and is destroyed with > the thread or the main process. > > But to shut up valgrind you could follow my example. > > Cheers, Andy > _______________________________________________ > xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml > _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
