362597 - Increased Rlk (leak) on balsa after landing of bug 354787

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Core :: Internationalization, defect)

Description

[Adam Guthrie]

--NEW-LEAKS-----------------------------------leaks------leaks%
nsCaseConversionImp2                             12          -

2524	MOZ_CO_DATE=2006:12:01:10:44
2536	MOZ_CO_DATE=2006:12:01:12:16

Check-ins: http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=all&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=explicit&mindate=2006%3A12%3A01%3A10%3A44%3A00&maxdate=2006%3A12%3A01%3A12%3A16%3A00&cvsroot=%2Fcvsroot

Not a huge deal, but probably something that should be fixed.

Comment 1

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

I think this is WONTFIX as the basic idea was to leave a static instance hanging around that would persist through XPCOM re-initialization.

Comment 2

[Robert O'Callahan (:roc) (email my personal email if necessary)]

agree, but why are we leaking 12 objects? or is that 12 bytes?

Comment 3

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

That's 12 bytes ( = 1 instance).

-> WONTFIX

Comment 4

[Benjamin Smedberg]

We should make it not screw up the leak stats. Can we just remove refcnt logging from this class?

Comment 5

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

If I'm reading this right then we'd have to manually implement addref/release. Is there no other way to disable refcount logging?

Comment 6

[Benjamin Smedberg]

Correct.

Comment 7

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Attachment: Patch

Here we go.

Comment 8

[Robert O'Callahan (:roc) (email my personal email if necessary)]

Why don't we just make the refcount always 1? This object never gets destroyed anyway.

Comment 9

[Benjamin Smedberg]

Why do we have a refcount at all?

Comment 10

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Wait, so you want them to be no-ops? Right now no one else creates one of these guys, but do we really want to neuter all instances?

Comment 11

[Benjamin Smedberg]

Why do we need more than one of them? Always return the singleton instance.

Comment 12

[Robert O'Callahan (:roc) (email my personal email if necessary)]

Right.

Comment 13

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Attachment: Patch

Okay, now just returns 1.

Comment 14

[Benjamin Smedberg]

Comment on attachment 247899 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch

This is ok, but I think you still need a singleton-constructor.

Comment 15

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Attachment: Patch

Now with singleton constructor. I also removed the unused and potentially problematic NS_NewCaseConversion function.

Comment 16

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Fixed on trunk.

Comment 17

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

And nsCaseConversionImp2 has dropped from the rlk logs