Kevin Sopp <baraclese <at> googlemail.com> writes:
If what you saying is true we perform first step twice. Second time before 6th step. Why would compiler do this?
Because in debug mode the compiler doesn't optimize this access. Maybe it does in release, maybe not. Maybe valgrind would still complain
I guess it's possible.
Can you test it? just create temp pointer test_unit* tu_ptr = tu.second; before delete.
I had to change the code like this to make it work:
// the delete will erase this element from map test_unit* tu_ptr = tu.second; m_test_units.erase( tu.second->p_id ); if( test_id_2_unit_type( tu_ptr->p_id ) == tut_suite ) delete (test_suite const*)tu_ptr; else delete (test_case const*)tu_ptr;
and I commented out the deregister_test_unit() code.
Or first delete the test_unit then erase tu from the map. I like to destroy objects in the opposite order in which they were created.
Why not just add test_unit* tu_ptr = tu.second; and keep everything else the same. deregister_test_unit have to be invoked from test_unit destructor for completely different reason (to handle exceptions during custom test_unit construction). Gennadiy