|
From: Sébastien de M. <sde...@ho...> - 2004-01-14 15:40:09
|
will it ever be able to do so ? is it due to the fact that it does its checking by replacing malloc and/or new by its own memory allocator ? I ask this because we use insure++ also and wanted to know if it was possible to rely only on valgrind sebastien _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: your free e-mail ! http://www.msn.be/hotmail |
|
From: Tom H. <th...@cy...> - 2004-01-14 15:49:53
|
In message <Sea...@ho...>
SXbastien de Menten <sde...@ho...> wrote:
> will it ever be able to do so ?
> is it due to the fact that it does its checking by replacing malloc
> and/or new by its own memory allocator ?
>
> I ask this because we use insure++ also and wanted to know if it was
> possible to rely only on valgrind
In general terms you can't do much stack checking without
instrumenting the code at compile time as it's very hard to
insert padding between stack variables at run time in order
to catch over/under runs.
There are some things valgrind will catch, like use of a stack
variable that is not initialised, or attempting to access an
address below the bottom of the stack.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (th...@cy...)
Software Engineer, Cyberscience Corporation
http://www.cyberscience.com/
|