在C或c++应用程序中出现内存泄漏是可以接受的吗?
如果分配一些内存并一直使用到应用程序中的最后一行代码(例如,全局对象的析构函数),会怎样?只要内存消耗不随时间增长,那么当应用程序终止时(在Windows、Mac和Linux上),是否可以信任操作系统为您释放内存?如果内存一直被使用,直到被操作系统释放,您会认为这是真正的内存泄漏吗?
如果是第三方库将这种情况强加给您,该怎么办?会拒绝使用第三方库,不管它有多好?
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。
No.
作为专业人士,我们不应该问自己“这样做是否合适?”,而应该问自己“这样做是否有一个好的理由?”“寻找内存泄漏是一种痛苦”并不是一个好的理由。
我喜欢把事情简单化。简单的规则是,我的程序应该没有内存泄漏。
这也让我的生活变得简单。如果我检测到内存泄漏,我会消除它,而不是通过一些复杂的决策树结构来确定它是否是“可接受的”内存泄漏。
它类似于编译器警告——警告对我的特定应用程序是致命的吗?也许不是。
但归根结底,这是一个职业纪律问题。容忍编译器警告和容忍内存泄漏是一个坏习惯,最终会给我带来麻烦。
举个极端的例子,外科医生把手术设备留在病人体内是可以接受的吗?
尽管移除设备的成本/风险可能会超过保留设备的成本/风险,并且可能在某些情况下它是无害的,但如果我在外科医生网站上看到这个问题,看到除了“不”之外的任何答案,这将严重削弱我对医疗行业的信心。
–
如果是第三方图书馆把这种情况强加给我,我会严重怀疑该图书馆的整体质量。这就像我试驾一辆车,发现其中一个杯托里有几个松动的垫圈和螺母——这本身可能不是什么大问题,但这表明我缺乏对质量的承诺,所以我会考虑其他选择。
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。
从历史上看,在某些边缘情况下,它在某些操作系统上确实很重要。这些边缘情况在未来可能会存在。
Here's an example, on SunOS in the Sun 3 era, there was an issue if a process used exec (or more traditionally fork and then exec), the subsequent new process would inherit the same memory footprint as the parent and it could not be shrunk. If a parent process allocated 1/2 gig of memory and didn't free it before calling exec, the child process would start using that same 1/2 gig (even though it wasn't allocated). This behavior was best exhibited by SunTools (their default windowing system), which was a memory hog. Every app that it spawned was created via fork/exec and inherited SunTools footprint, quickly filling up swap space.