https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97345
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #3) > (In reply to anlauf from comment #2) > > + > > + mpz_clear (do_start); > > + mpz_clear (do_end); > > + mpz_clear (do_step); > > } > > Harald, when I was looking at this PR, I came to the conclusion that only > do_step needs to be cleared. I think the do_start and do_end get hooked > into an iterator, but don't remember the details. I got sidetracked on the > the broken valgrind utilities I have on FreeBSD. The above is almost correct; the clearing of do_start and do_end does need to be protected by if (have_do_...). Otherwise regtesting goes sideways... :-O > I don't think a test case is needed if you use valgrind to verify that the > memory leaks are gone. Sure, there are enough do-loop tests already present > in the testsuite that will fail if the patch goes left. Indeed!
