Re: Does dropping objects really free memory?

[Marcus G. Daniels]

>>>>> "FM" == Fabio Mascelloni <address@hidden> writes:

FM> [[secondArray atOffset: idx] drop]; <<<= = = = STATUS ACCESS VIOLATION!

On Windows NT 4.0 and Solaris 2.7, I don't get a crash.  I'm using
the current sources, though.  Although I can't think of a recent 
fix that would explain that you do get a crash, you might
want to grab a new DLL.

FM> I've not understood well when dropping an object gives an S.A.V
FM> yet:

FM> a) When you try to drop an object belonging to another collection?
FM> b) When you try to drop an object that's still referenced by some other?

Segmentation faults occur when you attempt to use a invalid memory.
For example, if you use a pointer that has been dropped.

FM> The copy method is so defined:

You'll want to drop the selfConfig block...

- (void)drop
{
  [[self getZone] free: selfConfig];
  [super drop];
}


                  ==================================
   Swarm-Support is for discussion of the technical details of the day
   to day usage of Swarm.  For list administration needs (esp.
   [un]subscribing), please send a message to <address@hidden>
   with "help" in the body of the message.