From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-28 12:49:50
Markus Schöpflin <markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Valgrind indicates that bjam is leaking memory. The worst is:
Well known; it's part of the design we inherited from Jam.
> ==1567== 518848 (186956 direct, 331892 indirect) bytes in 4249 blocks are
> definitely lost in loss record 13 of 21
> ==1567== at 0x34149568: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:130)
> ==1567== by 0x8052FE8: parse_make (parse.c:80)
> ==1567== by 0x804F77F: yyparse (jamgram.y:318)
> ==1567== by 0x8052F96: parse_file (parse.c:54)
> ==1567== by 0x804E781: main (jam.c:446)
> Did anyone ever check with other tools whether there is indeed a memory
> leak? Is is worth the effort?
Nope; it's like a compiler. It runs and then it exits.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk