Any chance of using unique_ptr or other RAII/etc ownership to make this API safer by default?
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:58 AM Raphael Isemann via Phabricator via llvm-commits <llvm-comm...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs > Review". > This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. > Closed by commit rL323138: Fix memory leak in > TestClangASTContext.TestRecordHasFields (authored by teemperor, committed > by ). > Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. > > Changed prior to commit: > https://reviews.llvm.org/D42386?vs=130926&id=130928#toc > > Repository: > rL LLVM > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D42386 > > Files: > lldb/trunk/unittests/Symbol/TestClangASTContext.cpp > > > Index: lldb/trunk/unittests/Symbol/TestClangASTContext.cpp > =================================================================== > --- lldb/trunk/unittests/Symbol/TestClangASTContext.cpp > +++ lldb/trunk/unittests/Symbol/TestClangASTContext.cpp > @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ > > #include "gtest/gtest.h" > > +#include "clang/AST/DeclCXX.h" > + > #include "lldb/Host/HostInfo.h" > #include "lldb/Symbol/ClangASTContext.h" > #include "lldb/Symbol/ClangUtil.h" > @@ -375,6 +377,9 @@ > empty_derived_non_empty_vbase_cxx_decl, false)); > EXPECT_TRUE( > > ClangASTContext::RecordHasFields(empty_derived_non_empty_vbase_decl)); > + > + delete non_empty_base_spec; > + delete non_empty_vbase_spec; > } > > TEST_F(TestClangASTContext, TemplateArguments) { > > > _______________________________________________ > llvm-commits mailing list > llvm-comm...@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits >
_______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
