Re: gwmem patches

Hi again,

patch commited to cvs.

Thanks,
Alex

Am 06.04.2009 um 10:56 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:

> Hi,
>
> Here it goes. gw_calloc + gw_strdup.
>
> BR,
> Nikos
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alexander Malysh
> To: Andreas Fink
> Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; [email protected]
> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 10:26 AM
> Subject: Re: gwmem patches
>
> Hi Nikos,
>
> we have at least one +1 so please repost your patch.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> Am 03.04.2009 um 17:37 schrieb Andreas Fink:
>
>> I'm +1 on gw_calloc. There's a few times I would have used it in  
>> the past so its nice to have it in gwlib.
>>
>> I see very little optimisation of strdup except we do a strlen  
>> twice (once explicit in the malloc line an done implicity in the  
>> strcpy) but it is never bad to save a few microseconds.. (who knows  
>> one might call this one a gazillion times...). so +1 for that one  
>> too.
>>
>>
>> On 02.04.2009, at 23:21, Alexander Malysh wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> thanks for your patch but:
>>>
>>> 1) thread.h patch was wrong. I fixed it in CVS.
>>> 2) gw_strdup optimisation looks OK, please submit as extra patch
>>> 3) gw_calloc, hmm... I don't really see any advantage of this one.  
>>> because
>>> x = gw_malloc(count*size);
>>> memset(x, 0);
>>>     do the same. why do we need this?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Alex
>>>
>>> Am 02.04.2009 um 19:09 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> An assortment of small patches to make check_memory_leaks work  
>>>> better:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Added support for gw_calloc, which is #undefed but not defined
>>>> 2) Replaced strcpy with memcpy in gw_strdup for better efficiency
>>>> 3) Added function prototype in thread.h for mutex_make_measured  
>>>> so that MUTEX_STATS compile correctly.
>>>>
>>>> Please decide and vote.
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>> Nikos<kannel.diff>
>>>
>>
>
> <kannel.diff>