On 2/23/20 8:23 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 08:28:33PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 07:33:39PM -0500, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>>> On 2/18/20 6:07 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>>> Valgrind gave me the following error:
>>>>
>>>> ==732== 112 (72 direct, 40 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely
>>>> lost in loss record 5,165 of 5,862
>>>> ==732== at 0x483AE63: operator new(unsigned long) (in
>>>> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
>>>> ==732== by 0x103A62D: lyx::Buffer::cloneBufferOnly() const
>>>> (Buffer.cpp:661)
>>>> ==732== by 0x11E583C: lyx::(anonymous
>>>> namespace)::copyToTempBuffer(lyx::ParagraphList const&,
>>>> std::shared_ptr<lyx::DocumentClass const>) (CutAndPaste.cpp:582)
>>>> ==732== by 0x11E5C6A: lyx::(anonymous
>>>> namespace)::putClipboard(lyx::ParagraphList const&,
>>>> std::shared_ptr<lyx::DocumentClass const>,
>>>> std::__cxx11::basic_string<wchar_t, std::char_traits<wchar_t>,
>>>> std::allocator<wchar_t> > const&, lyx::BufferParams) (CutAndPaste.cpp:613)
>>>> ==732== by 0x11E910B: lyx::cap::copySelection(lyx::Cursor const&,
>>>> std::__cxx11::basic_string<wchar_t, std::char_traits<wchar_t>,
>>>> std::allocator<wchar_t> > const&) (CutAndPaste.cpp:1123)
>>>> ==732== by 0x11E84F8: lyx::cap::copySelection(lyx::Cursor const&)
>>>> (CutAndPaste.cpp:1024)
>>>> ==732== by 0x13ECDAB: lyx::Text::dispatch(lyx::Cursor&,
>>>> lyx::FuncRequest&) (Text3.cpp:1593)
>>>> ==732== by 0x1767E04: lyx::InsetText::doDispatch(lyx::Cursor&,
>>>> lyx::FuncRequest&) (InsetText.cpp:339)
>>>> ==732== by 0x15FFC39: lyx::Inset::dispatch(lyx::Cursor&,
>>>> lyx::FuncRequest&) (Inset.cpp:325)
>>>> ==732== by 0x11D1B13: lyx::Cursor::dispatch(lyx::FuncRequest const&)
>>>> (Cursor.cpp:825)
>>>> ==732== by 0x1816F4F:
>>>> lyx::frontend::GuiView::dispatchToBufferView(lyx::FuncRequest const&,
>>>> lyx::DispatchResult&) (GuiView.cpp:3878)
>>>> ==732== by 0x181B959:
>>>> lyx::frontend::GuiView::dispatch(lyx::FuncRequest const&,
>>>> lyx::DispatchResult&) (GuiView.cpp:4569)
>>>>
>>>> It comes from the following line (Buffer.cpp:661):
>>>>
>>>> cloned_buffers.push_back(new CloneList);
>>>>
>>>> Currently cloned_buffers is a list<CloneList *>. Would it make sense to
>>>> make it a list of *smart* pointers instead? Alternatively we could make a
>>>> class and then make a custom destructor that would free the CloneLists
>>>> that the list elements point to?
>>> This is some kind of thinko, probably on my part. The code at line 549
>>> was supposed to be cleaning this up, but it actually only removes the
>>> entry from the list.
>>>
>>> If it works to make it a smart pointer of some kind, then that would be
>>> simplest. But I think we could just do something like:
>>>
>>> else {
>>> delete(*it);
>>> cloned_buffers.erase(it);
>>> }
>> Ah that makes sense.
> Riki, I propose that you commit. Thanks for the fix.
Just to check: You've verified this fixes the problem?
Riki
--
lyx-devel mailing list
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
