Fix memory leak from d8 shell.

Fix memory leak from d8 shell.

We were not disposing the semaphores and the thread used in SourceGroup.

R=mnaganov@chromium.org

Signed-off-by: Thiago Farina <tfarina@chromium.org>;

Committed: http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=9198

[mnaganov (inactive), 2011-09-08 12:42:44]

On 2011/09/08 01:30:56, tfarina wrote:

What about thread_? It doesn't seem to delete itself as well.

[tfarina, 2011-09-08 13:19:21]

On 2011/09/08 12:42:44, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> On 2011/09/08 01:30:56, tfarina wrote:
> 
> What about thread_? It doesn't seem to delete itself as well.

Done.

[mnaganov (inactive), 2011-09-08 13:56:43]

On 2011/09/08 13:19:21, tfarina wrote:
> On 2011/09/08 12:42:44, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> > On 2011/09/08 01:30:56, tfarina wrote:
> > 
> > What about thread_? It doesn't seem to delete itself as well.
> 
> Done.

LGTM, landed.

[Vitaly Repeshko, 2011-09-08 17:29:05]

On 2011/09/08 13:56:43, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> On 2011/09/08 13:19:21, tfarina wrote:
> > On 2011/09/08 12:42:44, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> > > On 2011/09/08 01:30:56, tfarina wrote:
> > > 
> > > What about thread_? It doesn't seem to delete itself as well.
> > 
> > Done.
> 
> LGTM, landed.

SmartPointer should have been named SmartArrayPointer as it expects an input
allocated using new[] and deallocates it using delete[]. Using it as a simple
scoped pointer for a single object is incorrect.

[tfarina, 2011-09-08 17:31:17]

On 2011/09/08 17:29:05, Vitaly Repeshko wrote:
> On 2011/09/08 13:56:43, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> > On 2011/09/08 13:19:21, tfarina wrote:
> > > On 2011/09/08 12:42:44, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> > > > On 2011/09/08 01:30:56, tfarina wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > What about thread_? It doesn't seem to delete itself as well.
> > > 
> > > Done.
> > 
> > LGTM, landed.
> 
> SmartPointer should have been named SmartArrayPointer as it expects an input
> allocated using new[] and deallocates it using delete[]. Using it as a simple
> scoped pointer for a single object is incorrect.

D'oh, I'll fix this. I'll change from SmartPointer to plain delete instead. :(
Is it worth sending a patch for renaming to SmartArrayPointer?

[Vitaly Repeshko, 2011-09-08 17:35:11]

On 2011/09/08 17:31:17, tfarina wrote:
> On 2011/09/08 17:29:05, Vitaly Repeshko wrote:
> > On 2011/09/08 13:56:43, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> > > On 2011/09/08 13:19:21, tfarina wrote:
> > > > On 2011/09/08 12:42:44, Mikhail Naganov (Chromium) wrote:
> > > > > On 2011/09/08 01:30:56, tfarina wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > What about thread_? It doesn't seem to delete itself as well.
> > > > 
> > > > Done.
> > > 
> > > LGTM, landed.
> > 
> > SmartPointer should have been named SmartArrayPointer as it expects an input
> > allocated using new[] and deallocates it using delete[]. Using it as a
simple
> > scoped pointer for a single object is incorrect.
> 
> D'oh, I'll fix this. I'll change from SmartPointer to plain delete instead. :(

Thanks.

> Is it worth sending a patch for renaming to SmartArrayPointer?

Yes, I think so.

[tfarina, 2011-09-08 18:03:23]

On 2011/09/08 17:35:11, Vitaly Repeshko wrote:
> > D'oh, I'll fix this. I'll change from SmartPointer to plain delete instead.
:(
> 
> Thanks.
> 
Uploaded the fix here http://codereview.chromium.org/7846022/

> > Is it worth sending a patch for renaming to SmartArrayPointer?
> 
> Yes, I think so.

Right, I'll do it next.

[tfarina, 2011-09-08 18:28:13]

On 2011/09/08 18:03:23, tfarina wrote:
> > > Is it worth sending a patch for renaming to SmartArrayPointer?
> > 
> > Yes, I think so.
> 
Uploaded a new patch for it in http://codereview.chromium.org/7852002/