dolfin team mailing list archive

["Martin Sandve Alnæs" <martinal@xxxxxxxxx>]

2008/6/20 Garth N. Wells <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
> Dag Lindbo wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I attach a script that runs Valgrind (memcheck) on all C++ demos (based
>> on the one that just runs all demos). My suggestion is that this be
>> included in the testing procedure.
>>
>> At present (on my machine) 17 of 31 demos result in a memory leak (!)
>> None of the demos produce a memory error.
>>
>> Note that most, but not all, leaks are due to XML parsing. Are these
>> really leaks? It is impossible for vg to understand memory pools and
>> other exotic memory management that are not explicitly freed. Glib does
>> this in the GTS interface. Maybe libxml2 does something similar. In that
>> case, I can easily provide a suppression for xml2.
>>
>
> I took a look and fixed at least one leak, but a few others don't look
> like leaks to me. Part of the problem is that I think we're using
> pointers is some classes where std::vector would be more appropriate,
> particularly in the mesh and dof map classes, which is a source of
> potential leaks and makes ownership unclear.
>
> Is there a reason that we use pointers for various arrays in the mesh
> classes rather than std::vector?

I believe you cannot get the pointer to std::vector content?
(At least not safely and portable?)

An alternative may be to use shared_ptr<real>,
if several classes are to use the same memory.

The main backsides are more template syntax
and no python support. The latest swig is supposed
to have support for using shared_ptr with python.

If you want to try shared_ptr for arrays, you need to
define an array deleter, I can dig up the code
if anyone's interested.

-- 
Martin