On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 07:24:49 -0700
Rob Tsuk wrote:
> > On Sep 17, 2017, at 6:40 AM, Siarhei Siamashka
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 07:52:29 -0700
> > Rob Tsuk mailto:r...@tsuk.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> From 662b17d0d691b567a3343af3439f5fbefe989584 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >> From: Ro
From: Rob Tsuk
Pixman uses __builtin_shuffle builtin function in the code, which
relies on GCC vector extensions. So we also need to have it in the
configure.ac test snippet code.
GCC and Clang have different incompatible builtin functions for
this functionality. Clang 4 now supports "shift vect
Your proposed modification to my patch makes sense. I’m not certain when I”ll
have time to perform it.
> On Sep 17, 2017, at 6:40 AM, Siarhei Siamashka
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 07:52:29 -0700
> Rob Tsuk mailto:r...@tsuk.com>> wrote:
>
>> From 662b17d0d691b567a3343af3439f5fbefe989584 Mo
On 18 September 2017 at 11:46, Siarhei Siamashka
wrote:
> This fixes a few small memory leaks detected by valgrind. This memory
> was allocated once on pixman library load and never freed (but still
> was reachable). The fix only helps if the compiler has support for
> __attribute__((constructor))
On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:46:06 +0300
Siarhei Siamashka wrote:
> This fixes a few small memory leaks detected by valgrind. This memory
> was allocated once on pixman library load and never freed (but still
> was reachable). The fix only helps if the compiler has support for
> __attribute__((construc
On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 03:19:13 -0700
Yuri wrote:
> On 09/18/17 03:07, Emil Velikov wrote:
> > Yes there's libraries that do all sorts of things to help lazy
> > users... I think pixman is not one of them.
>
> pixman allocates and maintains the object, so it should ensure that it
> is also prope
This fixes a few small memory leaks detected by valgrind. This memory
was allocated once on pixman library load and never freed (but still
was reachable). The fix only helps if the compiler has support for
__attribute__((constructor)) and __attribute__((destructor))
function attributes.
Reported-b
On 09/18/17 03:07, Emil Velikov wrote:
Failure to call a destructor in C code could be interpreted as a used error,
or as a library error. I prefer to call it a library error, because it's
easier to just destroy it in the library, and not depend on users.
One can call it spaceship if they want t
On 17 September 2017 at 22:25, Yuri wrote:
>> What you reported seems like an user error. Although without a proper
>> log nobody can tell you for sure.
>> The leak I've spotted is a genuine leak in pixman.
>
>
> Failure to call a destructor in C code could be interpreted as a used error,
> or as