Hi!

I used VFP6.0 SP3 in Win NT 4.0 SP6.

Weird. Is it with text boxes only? Will try it...

>>Hi!
>>
>>I usually set it ON too. However, for speed testing or for long loop I set it off to speed up things in dev mode - that is what I mentioned.
>>
>>Whell, my form was very basic too... What version of VFP you used when problem found?
>
>Here I have VFP6.0 with SP4. Windows 95.
>
>At home VFP6.0 with SP4. Windows 98.
>
>>
>>>>Hi!
>>>>
>>>>the article is in the Prgrammer's guide for VFP, chapter 15. Read that chapter completely. Do nto forget about VFP.AutoYield. As well as do not forget about the status bar, standard toolbar (showing current database) and all other development mode things that slow down app running.
>>>
>>>Vlad,
>>>
>>>I usually set status bar on, because I like to use it to provide additional information. I haven't checked _VFP.AutoYield. The form I made to replicate the problem was the base class form with base class textboxes. I haven't changed other settings.
>>>
>>>I would try this test one more time.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>We do not practice the same form opened for decades. Good Client-Serevr app have tools running each night for maintenance, data integrity checking, backups etc. that requires shutdown of any client applications anyway. Such application have no problem with memory leak, because they just do not alive more than 10 hours without shutdown ;)
>>>>
>>>>>>Hi!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Take a look to the MSDN. There is an article somewhere about the optimizing the speed of application. Certain VFP settings have a significant influence on the VFP program running speed. I did read the article, made these settings as default for development mode and forget. I can find it again and post the exact list of commands.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As about the form, it is a simple VFP form just created, 2 comboboxes with the 'Value' row source typoe and some values list in row source, and a shape with a click code. Than put a button, added a code posted here and ran. Memory increased just from the first SetAll call, but than no increases over the entire loop. Increase was ~512 bytes and reduces by ~64 bytes after sys(1104) command use. So, is that 512 additional bytes a problem?
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Vlad,
>>>>>would be nice to have MSDN's article.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, the additional Bytes are not a problem to me, if it works like yours or with mine classes. The question is, why those leakage on others? Simple to avoid the problem. Anyway, some customers like to have the one form of the one application open for decades, even 1/2KB may add up to MB.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Lutz