Xref: news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:7094 From: Thomas Demmer Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Freeing and not freeing Windoze memory Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 09:10:23 +0100 Organization: Lehrstuhl fuer Stroemungsmechanik Lines: 38 Message-ID: <320EE6EF.41C6@LSTM.Ruhr-UNI-Bochum.De> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: bvb.lstm.ruhr-uni-bochum.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On 10 Aug 1996, john miller wrote: > > > Under DOS I believe that it is not necessary to free malloced memory > > because DOS reclaims all of the memory when the program ends. Is the > > same true under Windoze and Windoze 95? > > It is the same under any operating system. When a program exits, all its > memory is freed by the OS. This is not always true. If you get DosMem via Int21h/??, the function number I forgot, the memory remains occupied. Otherwise TSRs would not really work. If you use [mc]alloc(), you are on the safe side and Eli is right. But I think it is a good practice to free the memory, because the program will hopefully crash when you have doen something wrong in your bookkeeping. If you are really pedantic, you say free(foo); foo=NULL; to reliably detect dereferencing memory you have already freed. -- Ciao Tom ************************************************************* * Thomas Demmer * * Lehrstuhl fuer Stroemungsmechanik * * Ruhr-Uni-Bochum * * Universitaetsstr. 150 * * D-44780 Bochum * * Tel: +49 234 700 6434 * * Fax: +49 234 709 4162 * * Voice/Fax Box: +49 2561 91371 2056 * * http://www.lstm.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/~demmer * *************************************************************