[reSIProcate] Really Strange compiler behaviour
Karl Mutch
kmutch at sonimtech.com
Fri Apr 21 14:28:55 CDT 2006
Point taken on the code etc ... One of the things that could be
happening is that as
the MSVC compiler matures it could be revealing problems areas of code
that in the
past worked as a result of a less aggressive compiler etc.
Even using pointers I think there will still be a partially constructed
object.
Thanks
Karl
_____
From: Matthias Moetje - TERASENS GmbH [mailto:moetje at terasens.com]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 10:19 AM
To: Karl Mutch; Scott Godin; Alexander Altshuler;
resiprocate-devel at list.sipfoundry.org
Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] Really Strange compiler behaviour
Karl,
thanks very much for your comments. I need to note that
this is not my code, it's the code that already existed and
probably it has worked on some compilers/platforms and on
others (e.g. VS 2005) perhaps no one has actually been using
the feature that makes this error relevant.
To me it seems that using pointers would be the best solution
to fix this, even if it breaks existing applications (but actually
it won't be much more than replacing the & with a * in a
derived ServerAuthManager and maybe deleting some *
operators.
Best,
Matthias
_____
From: Karl Mutch [mailto:kmutch at sonimtech.com]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 6:26 PM
To: Matthias Moetje - TERASENS GmbH; Scott Godin; Alexander
Altshuler; resiprocate-devel at list.sipfoundry.org
Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] Really Strange compiler behaviour
I believe the problem you are having is that you are using the
this pointer of a
partially constructed object.and passing it into another
constructor. If this does
work then it is purely by chance/side effect etc, especially if
you are using this
code in a release build with MSVC. In any event I dont think
this is really legal ?
Boost provides a means for controlling the order of member
initialization that may
help your chicken and egg situation, which leads me to a rant
about why are we
not using boost, memory leaks et al, but I will restrain myself
;-)
Thanks
Karl
-----Original Message-----
From:
resiprocate-devel-bounces at list.sipfoundry.org
[mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces at list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of
Matthias Moetje - TERASENS GmbH
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 6:31 AM
To:
resiprocate-devel at list.sipfoundry.org
Subject: [reSIProcate] Really Strange
compiler behaviour
Hi,
I am experiencing some really strange
behaviour on the
following lines in the constructor of
DialogUsageManager:
mIncomingTarget = new
IncomingTarget(*this);
mOutgoingTarget = new
OutgoingTarget(*this);
Actually the objects are created through
_nh_malloc_dbg
when I debug through the generic runtime
implementation
of the new operator; afterwards the
constructors of
the object and the inherited objects are
called. Though,
in the end the result from the new
operator is not assigned
to the pointer variable i.e. in the end
the pointer variable
is NULL.
But if I note the pointer from the
operator new implementation
and assign it to the variable(s)
manually in the debugger, everything
is fine!
Seems very strange to me! I'm using
VS.NET 2005. All I could
think of here is probably the way the
dum object itself is
passed into the constructor (*this)..?
Does anyone have an idea why this
happens? I thought of
passing dum as a pointer instead, but
that would require a
change to dum itself...
I would be very thankful for any hints
on this, I have no other
idea about that...
Best regards,
Matthias Moetje
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20060421/cfdc69f0/attachment.htm>
More information about the resiprocate-devel
mailing list