comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » yet another idl memory question

Home » Public Forums » archive » yet another idl memory question

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: yet another idl memory question [message #66964 is a reply to message #66785]

Mon, 15 June 2009 12:07

ben.bighair
Messages: 221
Registered: April 2007

Senior Member

On Jun 8, 3:57 pm, Paolo <pgri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 8, 3:05 pm, David Fanning <n...@dfanning.com> wrote:
>
>> Paolo writes:
>>>> Of course, data=3D0B doesn't free *all* the memory,
>>>> and doing this many times leads, I suspect, to the memory
>>>> fragmentation that is the heart of the problem. I suggest
>>>> you use UNDEFINE. That really does release *all* the memory
>>>> associated with a variable.
>
>>> Really? Certainly it's not a substitute for ptr_free, is it?
>>> At least not in my system:
>
>> Well, I think you are confusing "variable", which is what
>> I claim, with "pointer to a variable", which I admit UNDEFINE
>> doesn't free. (I think it was written *before* pointers, to
>> tell you the truth!)
>
> Well, for me pointers are just another kind of variables :)
>
> In fact, I don't think IDL has anything like classic
> "pointers to variables": pointers are just references to
> data in memory (similar to regular variabes), because a
> command such as ptr_new(A) just duplicate the contents of A
> to a new memory location, so there is no such a thing as a
> true pointer to variable A, right?
>

Hi,

I don't know about the technical deep down stuff, but don't forget
that PTR_NEW accepts the /NO_COPY keyword. From the online help... "If
the NO_COPY keyword is set, the value data is taken away from the
InitExpr variable and attached directly to the heap variable. This
feature can be used to move data very efficiently. However, it has the
side effect of causing the InitExpr variable to become undefined."

Cheers,
Ben

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		yet another idl memory question By: jw2519 on Thu, 04 June 2009 08:53
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: pgrigis on Wed, 10 June 2009 15:01
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: David Fanning on Wed, 10 June 2009 14:15
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: JDS on Mon, 15 June 2009 11:57
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: David Fanning on Mon, 08 June 2009 13:09
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: pgrigis on Mon, 08 June 2009 12:57
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: ben.bighair on Mon, 15 June 2009 12:07
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: pgrigis on Mon, 08 June 2009 12:56
		Re: yet another idl memory question By: David Fanning on Mon, 08 June 2009 12:05

Previous Topic:	Re: 4 byte integers
Next Topic:	idl encoder/decoder of json

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Oct 10 07:31:15 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.43418 seconds