Narrowing in on memory problems but they still exist

1 files changed, 17 insertions, 9 deletions

diff --git a/TAO/tests/Sequence_Iterators/Unbounded_Objectref.cpp b/TAO/tests/Sequence_Iterators/Unbounded_Objectref.cpp
index 83a43406154..20c83be5273 100644
--- a/TAO/tests/Sequence_Iterators/Unbounded_Objectref.cpp
+++ b/TAO/tests/Sequence_Iterators/Unbounded_Objectref.cpp
@@ -315,6 +315,8 @@ int test_const_sequence ()
   // Memory is leaked here from
   // TAO::details::string_traits_base<char>::default_initializer()
 
+  /*
+   * The copy call below causes double deletes and seg faults.
   std::copy (a.begin (),
              a.end (),
              test.begin ());
@@ -328,6 +330,7 @@ int test_const_sequence ()
     {
       FAIL_RETURN_IF ((*copya_iter)->id () != (*copytest_iter)->id ());
     }
+  */
 
   /// Testing - using ostream_iterator
   /// JWH2 - I don't think the ostream test makes sense for object references.
@@ -522,17 +525,20 @@ int test_const_sequence_reverse ()
 
   // setup of an example sequence
   /*
-   * JWH2 - I don't think _duplicate is needed. Memory leaks show
-   * up when it's used.
+   * JWH2 - Memory leaks show up when duplicate is used. However,
+   * seg faults occur if it's not used.
+   */
   setup[0] = mock_reference::_duplicate (elem0);
   setup[1] = mock_reference::_duplicate (elem1);
   setup[2] = mock_reference::_duplicate (elem2);
   setup[3] = mock_reference::_duplicate (elem3);
-  */
+
+  /*
   setup[0] = elem0;
   setup[1] = elem1;
   setup[2] = elem2;
   setup[3] = elem3;
+  */
 
   // JWH2 - I think the double delete problem is here. Shouldn't the
   // underlying assignment operator make sure memory is allocated as
@@ -643,9 +649,8 @@ int test_const_sequence_reverse ()
   tested_sequence test;
   test.length (a.length ());
 
-  // Memory is leaked here from
-  // TAO::details::string_traits_base<char>::default_initializer()
-
+  /*
+   * The copy call below causes double deletes and seg faults.
   std::copy (a.begin (),
              a.end (),
              test.begin ());
@@ -659,6 +664,7 @@ int test_const_sequence_reverse ()
     {
       FAIL_RETURN_IF ((*copya_iter)->id () != (*copytest_iter)->id ());
     }
+  */
 
   /// Testing - using ostream_iterator
   /// JWH2 - I don't think the ostream test makes sense for object references.
@@ -695,7 +701,7 @@ int main(int,char*[])
   // Test Const_Generic_Sequence_Iterator with const sequence.
   // JWH2 - This test is causing a segmentation fault - a double delete of the
   // sequence (and the elements in it). I'm not sure why.
-  //status += test_const_sequence< tested_sequence::const_iterator> ();
+  status += test_const_sequence< tested_sequence::const_iterator> ();
 
   // Test Generic_Sequence_Reverse_Iterator.
   status += test_sequence_reverse< tested_sequence::reverse_iterator> ();
@@ -705,8 +711,10 @@ int main(int,char*[])
 
   // Test Const_Generic_Sequence_Reverse_Iterator with const sequence.
   // JWH2 - This test is causing a segmentation fault - a double delete of the
-  // sequence (and the elements in it). I'm not sure why.
-  //status += test_const_sequence_reverse< tested_sequence::const_reverse_iterator> ();
+  // sequence (and the elements in it). I'm not sure why. I've commented out
+  // the use of std::copy which causes problems. This call also leaks memory.
+  // The sequence isn't getting cleaned up properly.
+  status += test_const_sequence_reverse< tested_sequence::const_reverse_iterator> ();
 
   return status;
 }