Warren Young wrote:
> Bill K wrote:
>> I know this is a mailing list, I was referring to deleting from the
> Sorry if I annoyed you, but the very fact that you asked suggested
> that you are more used to web forums, corporate email systems, or
> other captive systems. On a public mailing list, you have to assume
> that once the message is gone, it's gone.
> > But ok, you can't
> Indeed. :) I "own" this project, but I don't have any special access
> to the mail servers. You'd have as much chance of success asking
> MySQL Inc.'s server admins directly to remove the message as I would.
>>> I think you've misdiagnosed the problem.
>> I never said I had diagnosed or otherwise narrowed down the problem.
> Uh, okay, I think you're arguing about semantics here. You offered a
> hypothesis as to where the problem is, and I told you that I thought
> you were wrong, giving evidence to back up my assertion. Is that
> distinction in phrasing really worth fighting for?
>> At first I thought the problem was with MS's known
>> std::basic_iostream memory leaking problem. ( info here:
>> ) However, I obtained a non-public hotfix from MS that supposedly
>> fixed that problem, which it looks like it did, when I test out
>> std::stringstream and std::iostream objects in a similar loop.
> I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that the problem is indeed
> fixed when you apply the patch, or that it only fixes the case of
> creating stream objects but not Query objects?
Sorry for the confusion. I am saying that the MS hotfix does not fix the
problem I am having with the query object, like I thought it would. The
MS hotfix fixed the memory leak in basic_iostream (used in fstream and
stringstream, and others) - which I thought may have fixed the query
object since it inherits from ostream. But no. I only mentioned the MS
hotfix so anyone aware of the memory leak in MS's CRT would know I have
a patch for it, so that shouldn't be the problem.
- Bill K.