Re: dealloc vs dealloc(n)

On 16/02/2008, at 3:30 PM, Mark S. Waterbury wrote:

Personally, I never, ever deallocate dynamically allocated storage.
Since the ILE heap is so large, we can usually afford to just keep on
issuing alloc for more and more storage. Eventually, at "end of job",
the whole ILE heap gets cleaned up automatically. So, this way, you
never have these problems with "dangling" pointers overlaying other
storage. (Also, those kinds of problems are usually very difficult to
debug.)

This approach also applies to all languages that can use dynamically
allocated ILE heap storage (even OPM MI assembler).

Might be fine for a program that always runs in its own job, starts, does some work, and ends, but for anything that may run frequently in an interactive job or a long-running batch server type job this is just asking for trouble. Memory leaks abound in code with plenty of storage available and eventually they cause problems.

I'm fairly sure you know that but there are others who might consider this lazy way an acceptable one.

Pointers are like farm gates: if you open (allocate) it you should close (deallocate) it. If it's already open leave it open. With pointers however, there are some sloppy functions that return an allocated pointer and expect the caller to deallocate so it's more of a guideline than a rule but the point (hardeharhar) is obvious.


Regards,
Simon Coulter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
FlyByNight Software OS/400, i5/OS Technical Specialists

http://www.flybynight.com.au/
Phone: +61 2 6657 8251 Mobile: +61 0411 091 400 /"\
Fax: +61 2 6657 8251 \ /
X
ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------