Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: Performance of nmap.
From: Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:55:00 -0700
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 10:23:07PM +0200, majek04 wrote:
David Warde-Farley wrote: So, for memory leaks we have valgrind, electric fence, google-perftools, dmalloc.
It may be worth trying some of the commercial tools (if they offer a free trial) to see if they find anything useful. Like Rational Purify. Or Insure++. Or maybe there are better options. Here is a list which includes some such tools: http://www.cetus-links.org/oo_testing.html .
Maybe someone know tool similar to gcov/gprof? (is there any replacement for windows?)
I don't know if Visual Studio has any sort of profiler. If it does, it may not be in the free (Visual C++ Express) version I use. Cheers, -F _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Current thread:
- Performance of nmap. majek04 (Jun 16)
- Re: Performance of nmap. David Warde-Farley (Jun 16)
- Re: Performance of nmap. majek04 (Jun 16)
- Re: Performance of nmap. Fyodor (Jun 18)
- Re: Performance of nmap. Richard Moore (Jun 19)
- Re: Performance of nmap. majek04 (Jun 19)
- Re: Performance of nmap. majek04 (Jun 16)
- Re: Performance of nmap. David Warde-Farley (Jun 16)
- Message not available
- Re: Performance of nmap. majek04 (Jun 16)
- Re: Performance of nmap. Fyodor (Jun 18)
- Re: Performance of nmap. majek04 (Jun 16)