PDA

View Full Version : Re: df3.1d memory



Stephen W. Meeley
13-Jun-2005, 02:28 PM
Glyn,

According to the 3.1 UIMS Reference, init_instance is part of the
private interface of the classes that use it. As part of the private
interface, the doc includes various warnings, like...

"This message is not sent by application programs, but this information
is provided to show how the base list class object is initialized."

"It is sent internally and should not be augmented or overridden by
developers."

....but of course, these warnings are never around when you need them.
Over the years, we have learned that documenting the private interface
can hurt more than help, so you'll find that the Visual DataFlex
reference doesn't even include references to things like init_instance.

Best regards,

-SWM-

-----Original Message-----
From: Glyn astill [mailto:glyn@wayahead.com]
Posted At: Monday, June 13, 2005 1:42 PM
Posted To: dataflex
Conversation: df3.1d memory
Subject: Re: df3.1d memory


Roger,

Thanks for this.

It seems to be working so far, the memory goes up and down rather than
just down all the time.

I'm failing to see the point of init_instance at the moment.

Glyn

Roger Loftus wrote:
> Glyn astill wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Roger,
>>
>>I will try this. Why do you suspect the init_instance is the problem?
>>
>>Regards
>>Glyn
>>
>
>
> Glyn:
>
> I am pretty sure using init_instance to reset your array is a misuse
> of its intended purpose. Once the array is activated, delete_data
> will purge all items form your array, release the memory used, and
> should do everything you need to do to start filling the array again.

> I am not sure, but init_instance may be setting aside memory for an
> object structure every time it is called. I may run a trace on the
> call out of curiosity just to see what happens. In any case, it is
> the most suspicous part of your program to me, and I think I would try

> removing init_instance to determine if it is the problem or not. I am

> at least pretty sure that your program will function without it.
>
> Roger loftus