Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- From: "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <reb01501@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 06:19:33 -0400
mayayana wrote:
As for myself, I ALWAYS set the actX objects to nothing,I'll second that. I find it odd that so many people
either when they are no longer needed, or before I close
my scripts. And it doesn't bother me at all that Mr Jones
is holding his nose in disgust, or even projectile vomiting
into his toilet when he sees my code. Call me mister fud.
have such strong reactions against simply being thorough.
My own theory is that Microsoft is moving toward total
memory management and the party line, therefore, is
that people people should think in those terms, not being
concerned with cleanup.
Then again, this is the company that's getting ready to
release an OS that needs about 1 GB of RAM just to sit
there. So maybe it's not so well advised to follow their
lead.....Personally, if I wanted an object every 15 minutes I'd
unload it each time.
Just to add fuel to the fire:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ericlippert/archive/2004/04/28/122259.aspx
--
Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
"NO SPAM"
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- From: mayayana
- Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- References:
- The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- From: Highlander
- Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- From: Anthony Jones
- Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- From: mr_unreliable
- Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- From: mayayana
- The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- Prev by Date: Re: How to know when file is finished being written to?
- Next by Date: Re: User's SID
- Previous by thread: Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- Next by thread: Re: The necessity of Setting Objects to Nothing
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|