somebody wrote:
> That's not clear to me. Note that "unreleased resources" ...etc need not be
> leaks.

Possibly not. Possibly they were released but not as early as they 
should have been.

> It just doesn't make sense to me to be able to claim a 50% reduction in
> memory in a leaky application, unless they halved the leaks as well instead
> of eliminating them <g>

Yeah. In any case, it's obvious that it's not going to be resolved on 
the basis of *that* article. :-)

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
  Helpful housekeeping hints:
   Check your feather pillows for holes
    before putting them in the washing machine.

Post a reply to this message