From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sergio Garcia Murillo wrote: > > > So if you're writting a custom application you have to take care for > > deleting the > > frames you write and the frames you read, but if you write a custom channel > > you > > don't have to worry? > > Shouldn't be better to have a general policy about it, for example the one > > that creates > > the frame has to take care of deleting it, or the one that consumes the > > frame is the one > > that deletes it. Just as an idea, as I said before I've just made > > everything static and > > fixed my problem. > > So what is your definition of 'consume'? The application you are writing > is the one that is 'consuming' the frames. If ast_write() was the > consumer, then you'd never be able to write the frame to more than one > location without duplicating it, which would be needless overhead. >
I agree, but I think that it's a usually a good practice that the one that allocates the memory is the reponsible of freeing it. What I don't really see is why the apps need to call the ast_frfree on frames they have just readen. Also as Russell pointed I perhaps should be using the ast_frame_header_new() if i really need to dinamically allocate frames. BR Sergio _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev