Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Joy of this, Joy of that
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 04:40:03 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: the-candyden-of-code
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <slrnvk7vdh.32tsq.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
References: <vhigot$1uakf$1@dont-email.me>
 <6iKdnTQOKNh6AqD6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <20241120081039.00006d2a@gmail.com> <vhlium$93kn$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhmprp$iaf1$1@dont-email.me> <lq9h4kF2tegU1@mid.individual.net>
 <vhpmo6$14s79$1@dont-email.me> <wwva5drk0m1.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
 <vhptgf$1614q$1@dont-email.me> <Iq40P.70904$EQue.62359@fx13.iad>
 <vhqr9n$1b2t7$8@dont-email.me> <rcf0P.211280$pZ%.136218@fx16.iad>
 <vhs16a$1k6ft$4@dont-email.me> <URp0P.4720$BuL8.1096@fx03.iad>
 <vhti42$1s5d5$7@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 05:40:03 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d26c70e7f62be0b914e96dff17e9d8d8";
	logging-data="2777168"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/MiWqOWkA7S/CrS6fD6KnjxiChTfcsZnEOY3ZFUF98ug=="
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gVRUKUyQI2YXAHQktQt1i11SxTc=
X-Face: b{dPmN&%4|lEo,wUO\"KLEOu5N_br(N2Yuc5/qcR5i>9-!^e\.Tw9?/m0}/~:UOM:Zf]%
 b+ V4R8q|QiU/R8\|G\WpC`-s?=)\fbtNc&=/a3a)r7xbRI]Vl)r<%PTriJ3pGpl_/B6!8pe\btzx
 `~R! r3.0#lHRE+^Gro0[cjsban'vZ#j7,?I/tHk{s=TFJ:H?~=]`O*~3ZX`qik`b:.gVIc-[$t/e
 ZrQsWJ >|l^I_[pbsIqwoz.WGA]<D
Bytes: 3285

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 21:40 this Saturday (GMT):
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 19:16:04 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2024-11-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 07:09:11 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-11-22, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 18:53:28 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> All my programs contain a routine called quit_cleanup(); it takes a
>>>>>> single argument, which is either an error message or NULL.
>>>>>> It frees all allocated memory, closes any open files, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> But all that is unnecessary if your program is terminating anyway.
>>>> 
>>>> Perhaps, but I'm a belt-and-suspenders guy - I like to explicitly free
>>>> everything come hell or high water.
>>>
>>> That actually slows down program termination.
>> 
>> The microsecond or two that is wasted is far less than the debugging
>> time needed when a shortcut goes wrong.
>
> Actually, thinking about it, there are some things -- shared memory 
> sections come to mind -- that are not automatically freed when a process 
> terminates. But everything else -- memory, open files, network connections 
> -- will go away automatically.
>
> If you have those persistent things that you want to clean up, your 
> technique won’t be reliable anyway.


Does it get freed up when the other processes that have it open also
close it, or is it stuck until shutdown?
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom