Marcus Meissner wrote:
Such a thing is not really implemented yet.
Does anyone have any objections to me having a go at implementing it (perhaps at some time in the future)?
There is a freeware tool called 'valgrind' which might be instrumentable, but I do not think it can cope with wines very own memory management yet.
It has a whole bunch of other limitations that do not look promising. Bad replacing stacks, bad own memory managment support (i.e. - we have to teach it how Windows allocates memory), no good support of threads. It seems to me like there is a LOT of porting work to do.
My suggestion, while nowhere near as powerful as that, is simple and with low overhead.
You could add assert(HeapValidate(heap,0,NULL))); around critical pieces of code, to call the heap checking more often. (replace heap by GetProcessHeap(), or whatever heap you use.)
I have found the specific cause of my corruption. I am talking about a "next time" tool, as well as an auditing tool (the most dangarous overruns are those that do not crash the program).
I was also not asking anyone to implement this. Just asking whether anything like that was already implemented, and whether there was any objections to me having a go at implementing it if not.
Shachar