Implemented visit_Return for freeing variables#2412
Merged
certik merged 2 commits intolcompilers:mainfrom Nov 9, 2023
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
Thirumalai-Shaktivel
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's fine, thank you!
Thirumalai-Shaktivel
approved these changes
Nov 9, 2023
Contributor
|
Can you add a test? Why not calling the function to subroutine pass? |
Contributor
|
This is fixing memory leaks. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #2411
We need to take care of two things
_lpython_return_variableI don't think so we need to free that.Now we would have something like
Where
stack0andstack1might be some local variables used inside the function, then followed by theReturnstatement.