Re: Please test pending bugfix release of base

[Richard Frith-Macdonald]

On 18 Jun 2011, at 14:32, David Chisnall wrote:

> On 18 Jun 2011, at 08:41, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
> 
>> I've toyed with the idea of providing a standard mechanism to register 
>> objects in some way rather than storing them in static variables, so we 
>> could (when in debug mode) release all such registered objects from an 
>> atexit handler.   Of course, going through all the codebase and changing all 
>> the deliberately 'leaked' data to be registered that way would be a large 
>> undertaking for no operational gain ... but the advantage for tracking leaks 
>> is big enough that I'd be prepared to devote some time to it.
> 
> 
> Valgrind will not report things stored in static variables as leaked (they 
> will be in the still reachable at exit total), so anything that valgrind is 
> reporting is really being lost.  

Actually it reports some (all?) such things as 'possibly lost' rather than 
'definitely lost' ... so if you actually want to check for leaks you need to 
step through all the valgrind output and check all those cases anyway (I 
certainly don't feel safe in ignoring a leak just because it says it's a 
'possible' one rather than a 'definite' one).