… just to make my comment complete, the response.file request.file issue I was mentioning has been fixed.
1 Like
A back port to 19R3.2 would be good thing. I doubt that it will happen.
A lot users cant use older versions anymore, because older IDE than 19 R3.2 don’t run on the current MacOS. They’re stuck on one buggy version…
I use all the way back to 18r2 under Bug Sewer on my Intel system and 18.3.2 runs well on my M1 Mini.
ya, on M1 again, but not under Big Sur on an Intel Mac, doesn’t it?
No - what I am saying is that 2018r3.2 runs under Big Sur on both the Intel and M1 (in translated mode) systems.
1 Like
Asking again, if anyone knows, what’s the latest Web 1.0 version that does not leak?
I’ve been on 2017r3, and recently bought a new subscription with the intention of using 2019r3.2. Have I made a mistake?
2 Likes
I’d like to know also Patrick. The closest we got was @Greg_O_Lone confirming that he couldn’t confirm that the same issue does not exist on Web 1 (which we know of course, hence the bit of this thread relating to Web 1)
https://forum.xojo.com/t/63378-linux-memory-leak-fix/62701/5?u=stevep
@Greg_O_Lone can you specify which version does not suffer from the issue that was fixed for Web 2 ?
1 Like
I still suspect the leak is caused by an updated dependency package/library. I had 15 docker containers running xojo2019 for years no worries, I noticed the leaks with the containers that had been recently rebuilt.
If we knew what package, we could wind back to a previous version to patch the issue.
1 Like
Again, I’d like to offer help.
If someone has a test project, which leaks (a lot), I may offer consulting services to check the project and look if you guys made a circular reference or if I can identify objects from the frameworks leaking and maybe find a way to clean those up. Let me know if you are interesting.
You don’t actually. All you know is that your apps are leaking, not that it’s the same in web1 vs web2.
Look, the http engine got a huge overhaul in web2 so we could properly support http/1.1 and yes, we created and have since fixed a memory leak in that area. Is it possible that a similar issue existed in web 1? Absolutely, but we’re also not going to sift through 12+ years of development logs to figure out when that may have been introduced in code that’s no longer being maintained. For all we know, it could have been a design flaw in the original code.
I would say this is the real problem for those who have to maintain Web 1 solutions.
A Long term support (LTS) version of Xojo could be the solution when you make such a huge change to the product.
3 Likes
And totally ignored again… 
Web 1.0 didnt had many fixes/new features in its last years, look at the release notes (https://documentation.xojo.com/Resources:Release_Notes) if is something worth the money there. I’m still with 2018r3 for that, Missing some IDE improvements but not a lot in web functionality.
Be aware that ANY new release could break your code so, just compile it with the newest release 2019r3.2 and TEST, TEST, and TEST more. DOnt expect a honest answer abouit if the release has leaks, just TEST it.
But if you feel the lack of support or the new release is too buggy for you, Remember that you have a 90-day money back guarantee
1 Like
But as I’ve said, the thing we fixed is not in the code base prior to 2020r1. If you had quoted that whole sentence, you would have included:
1 Like
Good to know. Thanks Greg.