On Fri, 2010-03-19 at 15:15 +0100, Frank Schoenheit, Sun Microsystems Germany wrote: > Hi Terrence, > > > Since I created issue 110236 > > <http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=110236> yesterday, I > > have encountered many occurrences. > > > > I have some time available. Do you have any suggestions about what this > > means > > usually, it means somebody did something like > char* foo = new char[n]; > .... > delete foo; > // correct would be: delete[] foo; >
By dumb luck, I have found the cause of a couple of these; fixes are in cws dba33f <http://dba.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=4337>. However, I have not found what library holds the object code for operators_new_delete.cxx. So it is hard to set a breakpoint to see what heap address is causing the assertion. (When a system library is calling delete or delete[], it is hard to work back to the call. When it is a proprietary driver doing the call, it is again hard; but now "hard" has an entirely different meaning <grin />.) I tried changing the source in operators_new_delete.cxx, but a rebuild did not reflect changes. I presume ... (a) Something in the build process does not recognize a dependency that it should. Does this sound plausible? Should something be fixed? Alas, I do not know enough even to think about the question. (b) A full build will incorporate my changes. It should not be long until _m76. The assertion failures are so distracting that I am considering removing the source line altogether from _m76 when it comes out. After all, it seems that most people do not even try to use a non-production build. If I had hope of being able to track down more causes, that would change my attitude. Cheers, Terry. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
