Robert Withrow wrote:
>
> So, do you want me to start doing the purify runs every night?
> If so, I still need to be able to build without user intervention...
> Preferably without using expect... ;-)
Hello Robert. I'm not familiar with Purify but I suspect that regular
runs of Purify will be _extremely_ useful, but most so _after_ someone
has started addressing the existing memory leaks and uninitialized
reads.
Igor has made several productive fixes in the frontend code but does not
have time at the moment to look at the backend code, and I am still
painfully ignorant on how to proceed with the output Robert sent to me.
Igor, is a Purify output listing sufficient to track down and fix memory
leak problems, or would it be most useful as a check to see that we
haven't introduced new problems in the future? What is the procedure you
use to identify and fix problems? Could you recommend a procedure which
would allow Robert to run Purify but allow others to debug the code, or
do you think it would be too cumbersome to work without having direct
access to Purify?
One concern I have is that we should be able to try to fix existing
leaks and test them in Purify _before_ committing them to the source
tree, otherwise we are likely to have a bunch of less-than-useful
intermediate versions committed into CVS.
Anyone have opinions/suggestions?
- Tom
------------------------------
