Re: [Quickfix-developers] quickfix memory leak

[<or...@qu...>]

So it turns out there was a leak here.  The returned copies were not
being stored in that collection and were never disposed of.  I solved
this right now by putting them in std::shared_ptr objects.  They are
supported in VS 2010, which is the oldest VS we currently support.  As
far as I can tell it's supported as far back as gcc 4.3 which I think
has been out for 7-8 years now.  So I think we're probably ok there. 
Would this realistically be a problem for anyone?

I think it would be nice to be able to use some modern smart pointers. 
When the project was started back in 2001, there was really nothing
standardized that was widely distributed other than the dependency
monster boost.  Now that there is I think it would help us avoid these
types of memory pitfalls.

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] quickfix memory leak
> From: Viktor Pogrebnyak <pohrebnyak@i.ua>
> Date: Thu, September 11, 2014 12:43 pm
> To: qui...@li...
> 
> 
> QuickFIX Documentation: http://www.quickfixengine.org/quickfix/doc/html/index.html
> QuickFIX Support: http://www.quickfixengine.org/services.html
> 
> I don't see where this code can leak except program termination due to
> missing cleanup for SessionFactoryu::m_dictionaries container.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> View this message in context: http://quickfix.13857.n7.nabble.com/quickfix-memory-leak-tp6680p6682.html
> Sent from the QuickFIX - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Want excitement?
> Manually upgrade your production database.
> When you want reliability, choose Perforce
> Perforce version control. Predictably reliable.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfix-developers mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers