I have read that the following code causes memory leak. But did not understand why.
CComBSTR str;
pFoo->get_Bar(&str);
pFoo->get_Baf(&str);
How does it cause a leak when we are not allocating anything?
I have read that the following code causes memory leak. But did not understand why.
CComBSTR str;
pFoo->get_Bar(&str);
pFoo->get_Baf(&str);
How does it cause a leak when we are not allocating anything?
It leaks because get_Bar()
and get_Baf()
don't know that you're using a CComBSTR.
When you take the address of a CComBSTR what you're actually passing to the underlying object is a pointer to the CComBSTR's BSTR member.
Breaking down the sequence:
CComBSTR str;
This initializes the internal BSTR to NULL.
pFoo->get_Bar(&str);
get_Bar()
sees a BSTR* and fills it with actual data. Like this:
HRESULT get_Bar(BSTR* arg) { *arg = SysAllocString(L"My String"); }
Now the internal BSTR of str
is a real BSTR. When CComBSTR goes out of scope it will delete the str
member.
Now if you call get_Baf()
on &str the problem is that the CComBSTR doesn't know that you are changing the string. So you call get_Baf()
like this:
HRESULT get_Baf(BSTR* arg) { *arg = SysAllocString(L"My String"); }
Now get_Baf()
has overwritten the original value of str
's internal BSTR without anyone freeing the data that was allocated by get_Bar()
.
Ta da - Memory leak.
This Microsoft page is probably the where you read about it:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bdyd6xz6.aspx
Memory Leak Issues
Passing the address of an initialized CComBSTR to a function as an [out] parameter causes a memory leak.
The CComBSTR object is allocating memory internally. Evidently there are cases where it doesn't release it.
© 2022 - 2024 — McMap. All rights reserved.