OOP: nested classes and undeleted objects and strings after removing the indi or script - what to do?

New comment
 

Hi,

I have written a three nested classes:

  1. a manager,
  2. the quotes class (as many instances as symbols required)
  3. the worker(s) (calculating hat is required)

Now this triumvirate is called either by an indicator and alternatively by a script (mainly for debugging)

Everything works fine so far until I remove the indicator or the script from the chart:

2017.04.20 12:06:23.066 Script test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: removed
2017.04.20 12:06:23.063 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: 2520 bytes of leaked memory
2017.04.20 12:06:23.063 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: 8 leaked strings left
2017.04.20 12:06:23.063 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: 3 objects of type CTicks left
2017.04.20 12:06:23.063 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: 1 object of type CWorker left
2017.04.20 12:06:23.063 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: 1 object of type CManager left
2017.04.20 12:06:23.063 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: 5 undeleted objects left
2017.04.20 12:06:23.061 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: uninit reason 1
2017.04.20 12:06:16.585 test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: initialized
2017.04.20 12:06:16.545 Script test_CWorker EURGBP,M1: loaded successfully
2017.04.20 11:59:01.304 Custom indicator CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: removed
2017.04.20 11:59:01.302 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: 2552 bytes of leaked memory
2017.04.20 11:59:01.302 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: 8 leaked strings left
2017.04.20 11:59:01.302 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: 3 objects of type CTicks left
2017.04.20 11:59:01.302 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: 1 object of type CWorker left
2017.04.20 11:59:01.302 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: 1 object of type CManager left
2017.04.20 11:59:01.302 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: 5 undeleted objects left
2017.04.20 11:59:01.302 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: uninit reason 1
2017.04.20 11:58:05.453 CWorkerIndi EURGBP,M1: initialized

Of course I put in the de-constructor of CManager the deletion of every link to the objects it controls: delete(..);

I even tried to follow the de-construction via DebugBreak() - which is just ignored :(

As well as a Print(__LINE__); as the first order in the deconstruction body to see in which sequence the various de-constructors are called - as you can see in the log: nothing like that. :(

And as the classes do have string arrays (Cmmt[10]) to show their state I put a ArrayFree(Cmmt) in the de-constructor - still I found 

8 leaked strings left

Do I make a mistake or shall inform the service desk?

Any hint what to do (may be except don't use nested classes).

Thanks in advance

Calli

 

@Carl Schreiber


Do you have any stripped out code that can replicate the problem?

 

Try tracking down the easiest candidate first. Your 1 CManager class is not being deleted.

Usually you would delete the CManager instance in the OnDeinit method

 

Sigh ..

BTW if I debug the script and stop the debugging I don't get the memory leaks:

2017.04.20 13:13:14.844 Script test_C3virat EURUSD,M1: removed
2017.04.20 13:13:14.829 test_C3virat EURUSD,M1: uninit reason 4
2017.04.20 13:13:14.748 test_C3virat EURUSD,M1: debugging terminated
2017.04.20 13:11:22.907 test_C3virat EURUSD,M1: initialized
2017.04.20 13:11:22.861 Script test_C3virat EURUSD,M1: loaded successfully
 
Carl Schreiber:

Sigh ..

BTW if I debug the script and stop the debugging I don't get the memory leaks:

Ok, that's a bit odd. However I doubt it's the platform.

You might have to create a test case and post it here (strip out the code as honest_knave suggested)

 
Ok, if I delete the Objects in OnDeinit() the de-constructors are called, my understanding was that if the objects are removed they call their destructor themselves - sigh, why do I have a computer if I still have to do everything on my own :(
 
Carl Schreiber:
Ok, if I delete the Objects in OnDeinit() the de-constructors are called, my understanding was that if the objects are removed they call their destructor themselves - sigh, why do I have a computer if I still have to do everything on my own :(
You would like Java and C#. They have garbage collectors which do much of the work for you.
 
Carl Schreiber: my understanding was that if the objects are removed they call their destructor themselves - sigh, why do I have a computer if I still have to do everything on my own :(
  1. True but if you new them (to a pointer,) you have to delete them before the last pointer goes out of scope.
  2. Because you new'ed them stating that you are responsible for them.
New comment