I'm going to give the unpopular but practical answer that it's always wrong to free memory unless doing so will reduce the memory usage of your program. For instance a program that makes a single allocation or series of allocations to load the dataset it will use for its entire lifetime has no need to free anything. In the more common case of a large program with very dynamic memory requirements (think of a web browser), you should obviously free memory you're no longer using as soon as you can (for instance closing a tab/document/etc.), but there's no reason to free anything when the user selects clicks "exit", and doing so is actually harmful to the user experience.

为什么?释放内存需要接触内存。即使您的系统的malloc实现碰巧没有在分配的内存块附近存储元数据，您也可能会遍历递归结构，只是为了找到所有需要释放的指针。

Now, suppose your program has worked with a large volume of data, but hasn't touched most of it for a while (again, web browser is a great example). If the user is running a lot of apps, a good portion of that data has likely been swapped to disk. If you just exit(0) or return from main, it exits instantly. Great user experience. If you go to the trouble of trying to free everything, you may spend 5 seconds or more swapping all the data back in, only to throw it away immediately after that. Waste of user's time. Waste of laptop's battery life. Waste of wear on the hard disk.

这不仅仅是理论上的。每当我发现自己加载了太多的应用程序，磁盘开始抖动时，我甚至不会考虑点击“退出”。我以最快的速度到达一个终端，输入killall -9…因为我知道"退出"只会让情况更糟。

这是一个非常特定的领域，几乎不值得回答。动动你的脑袋。

航天飞机操作系统:不，不允许内存泄漏 快速开发概念验证代码:修复所有这些内存泄漏是浪费时间。

还有一系列的中间情况。

延迟产品发布以修复除最严重内存泄漏外的所有内存泄漏的机会成本($$$)通常会让“草率或不专业”的感觉相形见绌。你的老板付钱给你是为了给他赚钱，而不是为了得到温暖、模糊的感觉。

我同意vfilby -这要看情况。在Windows中，我们将内存泄漏视为相对严重的错误。但是，这很大程度上取决于分量。

例如，对于很少运行且运行时间有限的组件，内存泄漏不是很严重。这些组件运行，完成工作，然后退出。当它们退出时，所有内存都被隐式释放。

但是，服务或其他长期运行组件(如shell)中的内存泄漏非常严重。原因是这些bug会随着时间的推移“窃取”内存。恢复的唯一方法是重新启动组件。大多数人不知道如何重新启动服务或shell——所以如果他们的系统性能受到影响，他们就重新启动。

所以，如果你有一个泄漏-评估它的影响两种方式

你的软件和你的用户体验。 对于系统(和用户)来说，节省系统资源是非常重要的。 修复对维护和可靠性的影响。 在其他地方造成倒退的可能性。

前甲板

我很惊讶看到这么多关于内存泄漏的错误定义。如果没有一个具体的定义，关于它是否是坏事的讨论就不会有任何结果。

正如一些评论员正确地指出的那样，只有当进程分配的内存超出作用域，以至于该进程不再能够引用或删除它时，才会发生内存泄漏。

A process which is grabbing more and more memory is not necessarily leaking. So long as it is able to reference and deallocate that memory, then it remains under the explicit control of the process and has not leaked. The process may well be badly designed, especially in the context of a system where memory is limited, but this is not the same as a leak. Conversely, losing scope of, say, a 32 byte buffer is still a leak, even though the amount of memory leaked is small. If you think this is insignificant, wait until someone wraps an algorithm around your library call and calls it 10,000 times.

我认为没有任何理由允许在您自己的代码中泄漏，无论多么小。现代编程语言，如C和c++，不遗余力地帮助程序员防止此类泄漏，并且很少有好的理由不采用好的编程技术——特别是在与特定的语言功能相结合时——来防止泄漏。

对于现有的或第三方代码，您对质量的控制或进行更改的能力可能非常有限，这取决于泄漏的严重程度，您可能被迫接受或采取缓解措施，例如定期重新启动进程以减少泄漏的影响。

更改或替换现有的(泄漏的)代码可能是不可能的，因此您可能不得不接受它。然而，这并不等同于宣称它是OK的。

我只看到了一个实际的缺点，那就是这些良性泄漏将在内存泄漏检测工具中显示为误报。

If I understood correctly, you don't explicitly free memory (which can be freed because you still have a pointer) and rely on OS to free it during process termination. Though this may seem okay for simple program, consider the situation where your code is moved into a library and becomes a part of some resident daemon process running 24/7. Say this daemon spawns a thread each time it needs to do something useful using your code and say it spawns thousands of threads every hour. In this case you will get real memory leak.

不幸的是，这种情况在现实生活中并非不可能，一致的内存管理技术可能会使您的生活更轻松。

如果分配内存并一直使用到程序的最后一行，这就不是泄漏。如果您分配内存并忘记它，即使内存数量没有增长，这也是一个问题。已分配但未使用的内存可能导致其他程序运行速度变慢或根本不运行。