我完全同意JohnMcG的观点，只是想补充一点，我自己也有问题，无法及时发现真实的、潜在的严重内存泄漏，只是因为人们已经接受了良性的内存泄漏。随着时间的推移，这些病毒变得如此之多，在大量的良性病毒中发现严重病毒就变得越来越困难。

因此，至少为了你的程序员同事(也是为了你自己的未来)，请尽快消除它们。

一般情况下，如果遇到无法避免的内存泄漏，则需要更加认真地考虑对象所有权问题。

但对于你的问题，我的回答是在产品代码中，是的。在开发过程中，没有。这听起来可能有些倒退，但我的理由是:

In the situation you describe, where the memory is held until the end of the program, it's perfectly okay to not release it. Once your process exits, the OS will clean up anyway. In fact, it might make the user's experience better: In a game I've worked on, the programmers thought it would be cleaner to free all the memory before exiting, causing the shutdown of the program to take up to half a minute! A quick change that just called exit() instead made the process disappear immediately, and put the user back to the desktop where he wanted to be.

但是，您对调试工具的看法是正确的:它们会突然发作，而且所有的假阳性可能会使查找真正的内存泄漏变得很痛苦。正因为如此，总是编写释放内存的调试代码，并在发布时禁用它。

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。

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。

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.