RE: [PHP-WIN] Re: Question about emalloc

> Well, I decided to see how the big boys dealt with strings, and had a root > around ext/standard. The following function is from string.c: > > PHP_FUNCTION(bin2hex) > { > zval **data; > char *result; > size_t newlen; > > if (ZEND_NUM_ARGS() != 1 || > zend_get_parameters_ex(1, &data) == FAILURE) { > WRONG_PARAM_COUNT; > } > convert_to_string_ex(data); > > result = php_bin2hex(Z_STRVAL_PP(data), Z_STRLEN_PP(data), &newlen); > > if (!result) { > RETURN_FALSE; > } > > RETURN_STRINGL(result, newlen, 0); > } > > As you can see, result is emalloc()'d, but not efree()'d at the end - looks > like the docs are right. I have since tried using this approach in a test > function and do not get any errors when I compile - what do you use for your > build? The result is efreed in that case. RETURN_STRINGL is a macro that assigns result to return_value and return_value is implicitly efreed by PHP. That's the only reason you are not getting a warning in that case. For other stuff that you emalloc but don't assign to return_value, you will get a warning if you do not efree it. -Rasmus