Karen
It's easy to remember your name cause it's the same as my
wife's...
Anywho... IMHO ... It's WINDOWS... and a bit to do with
programming in a windows environment. Because windows offers
more... if something doesn't go just so-so there are blocks
of memory never released back to the OS, and we all know
that there are times even when you call Windows API, or
MFC, or someother flavor that the OS itself has memory
leaks -- unreleased memory... The way Windows programming
works is that objects are created and they do the work
through their methods and properties (functions and
variable assignments) and like I said if all goes well,
the object gets destroyed when the programmer is through
with it. This is not always the case - obviously. I don't
know how much programming you have done in VB/ C++ or some
other languages, but the objects created to do work in a
Windows environment can be huge... At least in the aspect
if you accumulate them without destroying them. All you have
to do in a lot of case is just have one variable referncing
the object in tens of thousands of line of code and it will
not destroy the object...
Sooo.... when we are using an funtion, or variable, or
a form or report that something is done the most optimal
way then we can create this memory leak ourselves...
I have seen what looked like great code, that turned out to
be absolute CRAP.... Most of it my own... Thanks to the
guru's on this list my programming habit have definitely
gotten better... Not near their league, but hey... one day
Jim Limburg
tellef wrote:
>
> My .02 on this topic. The QUIT TO was invaluable when we
> were all programming on computers running on DOS. We were
> working with 640K of memory. We became experts on moving
> things into high memory to free up space. We all knew to
> increase our FILES setting. We played around with other
> RBase memory block settings (like those -z switches). This
> stuff was necessary because of the limitations of the DOS
> operating system.
>
> I agree that simply running a DOS application on a Windows
> machine doesn't help matters; as a matter of fact it
> complicates things more than it helps things. But I really
> thought that running Windows programs on a Windows operating
> system meant that we didn't have to worry about that kind of
> stuff anymore! As long as you're not running with 4MB of
> memory, I didn't think we were supposed to be worried about
> running out of memory! What happened? Who has dropped the
> ball on this?
>
> Karen
