<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED FIXED - lp_bld_misc.cpp:503:40: error: no matching function for call to ‘llvm::EngineBuilder::setMCJITMemoryManager(ShaderMemoryManager*&)’" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86958#c6">Comment # 6</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED FIXED - lp_bld_misc.cpp:503:40: error: no matching function for call to ‘llvm::EngineBuilder::setMCJITMemoryManager(ShaderMemoryManager*&)’" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86958">bug 86958</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:chris@cvine.freeserve.co.uk" title="Chris Vine <chris@cvine.freeserve.co.uk>"> Chris Vine</a> <pre>Emil, OK about your first point, and thanks. On your second, as the name suggests the whole purpose of std::unique_ptr is to take unique ownership. a unique_ptr will delete any object it still owns, in its destructor. Ownership is transferred from one unique_ptr to another by passing the unique_ptr as an rvalue. This will release ownership in the movant and pass it to the movee. You must never call delete manually on an object owned by a unique_ptr or you will get a double delete, so this code is definitely wrong. Of course this begs the question of what EngineBuilder::setMCJITMemoryManager(ShaderMemoryManager*) does in llvm < 3.6. If that method also tries to delete its argument when finished with, you would get a double delete in the error case (ie where EngineBuilder::create() fails) for earlier versions of llvm. In other words, the delete call may be wrong in all cases. Do you want me to open a separate bug to say so?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>