Re: gwmem patches

Did this patch has been tested ?


In file included from ./gwlib/gwlib.h:83,
                  from gw/msg.h:69,
                  from gw/sms.h:89,
                  from gw/sms.c:65:
./gwlib/gwmem.h:188:1: warning: "strdup" redefined
In file included from /usr/include/string.h:423,
                  from ./gwlib/gwlib.h:72,
                  from gw/msg.h:69,
                  from gw/sms.h:89,
                  from gw/sms.c:65:
/usr/include/bits/string2.h:1316:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition


Vincent.


Alexander Malysh a écrit :
> 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 <mailto:[email protected]>
>>     *To:* Andreas Fink <mailto:[email protected]>
>>     *Cc:* Nikos Balkanas
>>     <mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]
>>     <mailto:[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>
> 

-- 
Telemaque - 06560 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS - (FR)
Service Technique/Reseau - NOC
Direction du Developpement xMS+
http://www.telemaque.fr/
[email protected]
Tel : +33 4 92 90 99 84 (fax 9142)