On 9/19/05, Neal Norwitz <nnorwitz at gmail.com> wrote: > I ran 2.4.x through valgrind and found two small problems on Linux > that have been fixed. There may be some other issues which could > benefit from more eyes (small, probably one time memory leaks). The > entire run is here: > > http://python.org/valgrind-2.4.2.out > > (I need to write a lot more suppression rules for gentoo.) > > I think I see a memory leak in win32_startfile. Since I don't run > windows I can't test it. > filepath should be allocated with the et flag to PyArgs_ParseTuple(), > but it wasn't freed without this patch. Does this make sense? See > the attached patch. That patch doesn't make sense to me -- the "s" code to PyArg_ParseTuple doesn't return newly allocated memory, it just returns a pointer into a string object that is owned by the caller (really by the call machinery I suppose). Compare other places using PyArg_ParseTuple(args, "s:..."). -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4