Hi,

I have a function using the derelict-enet library:

void sendUbytes(ENetPeer* dest, ref ubyte[] data)
{
    //create packet
    ENetPacket* packet = enet_packet_create(cast(ubyte*)data, data.length * ubyte.sizeof, ENET_PACKET_FLAG_RELIABLE);

    //send packet to peer over channel id 0
    enet_peer_send(dest, 0, packet);

    //destroy packet
    enet_packet_destroy(packet);
}

If I comment out the last part (enet_packet_destroy()) the program eventually consumes all my RAM. If I do not, I get occasional segfaults. Please help. Thanks.

On Sunday, 29 November 2015 at 01:30:14 UTC, Kyle wrote:
> void sendUbytes(ENetPeer* dest, ref ubyte[] data)
> {
>     //create packet
>     ENetPacket* packet = enet_packet_create(cast(ubyte*)data, data.length * ubyte.sizeof, ENET_PACKET_FLAG_RELIABLE);

So I'm not familiar with this library, but a note on D: it is usually a mistake to pass "ref something[]". The ref is unnecessary.

I would also recommend against using `cast(ubyte*)data`. Instead, use `data.ptr`.

>     //send packet to peer over channel id 0
>     enet_peer_send(dest, 0, packet);
>
>     //destroy packet
>     enet_packet_destroy(packet);
> }
>
> If I comment out the last part (enet_packet_destroy()) the program eventually consumes all my RAM. If I do not, I get occasional segfaults. Please help. Thanks.


The tutorial says that after you send it, you should not destroy it - the library will do that for you.

http://enet.bespin.org/Tutorial.html#SendingPacket

"Once the packet is handed over to ENet with enet_peer_send(), ENet will handle its deallocation and enet_packet_destroy() should not be used upon it."


So you definitely don't want to destroy.

Are you sure the memory leak is in here? Maybe it is crashing before you can see it use all the memory with this line there.



Are you compiling it as a 64 bit or a 32 bit program?

On Sunday, 29 November 2015 at 01:57:25 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
..
> Are you compiling it as a 64 bit or a 32 bit program?

64 bit. You're probably right, I will take out the explicit destroy and look for a memory leak elsewhere, and adjust for your other suggestions. Thanks for the advice!