Leaks: An Indepth Explanation

[Peetoon]

Guess I'm wrong

Scrapped. Please delete.

 

[PurplePoot]

This paints several different and unrelated things with one brush, and attempts to attribute the effects of object leaks to the causes of pointer leaks.

Also, I somehow doubt warcraft's allocator does an O(n) search for new indexes, seeing as there are simple and well-known algorithms to accomplish O(1) instead.

 

[busterkomo]

The rules on leak removal is pretty simple, if that object is there to stay permanently, you don't have to null the handles pointing to it. The only examples I can think of for this are triggers that last the entire game and globals that point to one thing forever. So, pretty much, null everything that is a handle, even globals if you destroy what they're pointing at.

Player variables don't need to be nulled either.

There is also an exception to the entire leak thing: boolexpr. Boolexprs act like strings do. They are saved in a table. That is, creating a new filter that you've made before actually just gets the old filter. That's why it's not suggested to destroy filters, you don't even have to null them.

It's worth mentioning the advantages of using a global boolexp.

 

[PurplePoot]

It's worth mentioning the advantages of using a global boolexp.

Not much, really.

 

[Peetoon]

Oh, I'm sorry. I seem to have been wrong on far too many points, which I had assumed to be correct. Nevermind then. Better delete this before people learn the wrong stuff.

 

[Pyritie]

Graveyarded.

In the future though, it's best not to completely blank your posts.