Follow-up Comment #5, bug #68585 (group groff):

> Any such revision should involve a coupled check of both the allocation and
> deallocation sites

Yes, that's exactly how I did it: For each affected class field, I searched
for the allocation, i.e. where the relevant constructor argument came from,
and for the deallocation, i.e. where this field gets destructed.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68585>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to