A primitive/destructive way to do what you want is to use _exit() (note the underscore) to avoid calling any of the destructors. Run valgrind/memcheck against your code that calls _exit() prior to do_something_curious(); run valgrind/memcheck again with _exit() after do_something_curious(); compare results to see what do_something_curious() has left around.
A primitive/destructive way to do what you want is to use _exit() (note the underscore) to avoid calling any of the destructors. Run valgrind/memcheck against your code that calls _exit() prior to do_something_curious(); run valgrind/memcheck again with _exit() after do_something_curious(); compare results to see what do_something_curious() has left around. I couldn't figure out how massif would do what you want (is there a way to have massif keep track of free/delete operations and reconcile with malloc/new operations that I missed?).
Thanks for this hint. It requires a bit more manual work, but it should given me the right result. – Andreas Roth Apr 12 at 6:06 1 A similar approach, using only one execution, is to call VALGRIND_DO_LEAK_CHECK instead of _exit().
See valgrind. Org/docs/manual/mc-manual. Html#mc-manual.
Clientreqs You would still have to compare the two reports by yourself. – adl Apr 30 at 9:15.
If you want to examine memory usage, try with valgrind's massif tool. Massif Visualizer is useful for interpreting the results.
The difference object should tell me which objects are allocated and where the memory has gone. – Andreas Roth Apr 8 at 9:41 Have a look at massif then. – Frank Osterfeld Apr 8 at 9:45.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.