comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Do we need PTR

Home » Public Forums » archive » Do we need PTR_FREE anymore?

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

Re: Do we need PTR_FREE anymore? [message #71983 is a reply to message #71928]

Fri, 30 July 2010 12:12

Adam Lefkoff
Messages: 3
Registered: July 2010

Junior Member

On 7/30/2010 11:29 AM, Michael Galloy wrote:
> On 7/30/10 11:07 am, James wrote:
>> Wlandsman, that example doesn't sound particularly obscure to me -- it
>> seems like it could come up frequently when dealing with linked data
>> structures.
>>
>> It's a little unusual that IDL has added garbage collection but kept
>> manual memory management intact. Most languages only offer one or the
>> other. It's pretty unusual for a language as high-level as IDL to
>> have manual memory management at all.
>
> But IDL has to continue to support manual memory management or else
> break backward compatibility. I would imagine that PTR_FREE and
> OBJ_DESTROY will be around for a long time.
>
> Mike

HANDLE_FREE still works too!

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Do we need PTR_FREE anymore? By: wlandsman on Wed, 28 July 2010 18:23
		Re: Do we need PTR_FREE anymore? By: Adam Lefkoff on Fri, 30 July 2010 12:12
		Re: Do we need PTR_FREE anymore? By: wlandsman on Fri, 30 July 2010 10:29
		Re: Do we need PTR_FREE anymore? By: Michael Galloy on Fri, 30 July 2010 10:29
		Re: Do we need PTR_FREE anymore? By: James[2] on Fri, 30 July 2010 10:07

Previous Topic:	IDL 8.0: How to update IMAGE data?
Next Topic:	100% free dell laptaps offerd by dell and Vodafone companies.

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Oct 10 14:04:25 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.04193 seconds