From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 69838 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2015 15:33:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 69546 invoked by uid 48); 16 Mar 2015 15:33:44 -0000 From: "mitya57 at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/65434] Memory leak in pool constructor Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:33:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: mitya57 at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg01611.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D65434 --- Comment #2 from Dmitry Shachnev --- Will anything bad happen if that memory is freed in the destructor? For me, the issue is mostly aesthetic =E2=80=94 I got used to not seeing an= y Valgrind warnings in my programs :) >>From gcc-bugs-return-480468-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Mar 16 15:42:51 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3125 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2015 15:42:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3063 invoked by uid 48); 16 Mar 2015 15:42:48 -0000 From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/37303] const compound initializers in structs are written to .data instead of .rodata Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:42:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.3.2 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cc resolution Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg01612.txt.bz2 Content-length: 524 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37303 Marek Polacek changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek --- This one should be fixed.