[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Bug in g++ 2.96
From: |
Michael Mwangi |
Subject: |
Bug in g++ 2.96 |
Date: |
Sat, 11 Oct 2003 00:26:29 -0400 (EDT) |
Hi:
Before I begin, I must first make the following disclaimer: Although I have
considerable programming experience, I do not consider myself by any means
to be an expert C++ programmer. The following may be nothing more than a
relection of my ignorance. If what I describe is not an actual bug, I would
be very appreciative if you could briefly explain to me how I can de-allocate
memory allocated by a set class, since everything I have tried is in vain
and every computer scientist I have asked seems as dumbfounded as I.
I am running g++ 2.96 on a i386 redhat linux platform. I think I discovered
a bug. I compiled and ran the following program.
#include <set>
int main()
{
unsigned long j;
set<unsigned long> *o = new set<unsigned long>();
for(j = 1; j <= 1000000; j++)
{
(*o).insert(j);
}
(*o).clear();
delete o;
while(1);
}
Using top, I monitored memory usage and noticed the delete operation did
not free the 24 MB allocated by the multiple calls to insert in the for
loop. This problem seems confined to the set and map classes. No matter
what I seem to do, I cannot de-allocate memory allocated by the set or map
classes. I do not enounter the problem with the vector class. For example,
I did not observe using top any memory leakage when I compiled and ran
#include <vector>
int main()
{
unsigned long j;
vector<unsigned long> *o = new vector<unsigned long>();
for(j = 1; j <= 10000000; j++)
{
(*o).push_back(j);
}
(*o).clear();
delete o;
while(1);
}
I know that clear alone at least for a vector does not de-allocate memory
since it merely erases the elements without altering the capacity.
Nevertheless, shouldn't the delete operation, whether it is applied to
an empty vector, set, or map, always perform the necessary de-allocation?
Michael Mwangi
- Bug in g++ 2.96,
Michael Mwangi <=