`Owner` property should be cleaned to avoid memory leaks
See original GitHub issueIs your feature request related to a problem? Please describe
Not all objects are cleaned after disposing of Control accessible objects because of keeping some value in Owner
.
Needs to suggest the opportunity to null Owner
in accessible objects to avoid memory leaks.
Describe the solution you’d like and alternatives you’ve considered
The suggestion is based on #6886 comment (see description)
Will this feature affect UI controls?
No
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created a year ago
- Comments:6 (6 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
`Owner` property should be cleaned to avoid memory leaks
Windows Forms is a .NET UI framework for building Windows desktop applications. - `Owner` property should be cleaned to avoid memory leaks ......
Read more >ViewLifecycleLazy and other ways to avoid View memory ...
Until now, the number one cause of memory leaks when using Fragments remains the same: not properly clearing all direct and indirect View...
Read more >Memory Leaks in Swift. Unit Testing ...
Learn memory leak traps in Swift and ways to eliminate them. Explore how to break retain cycles, unit test leaks and make your...
Read more >Fix your Android Memory Leaks in Fragments
As a result, this prevents the garbage collector from cleaning up the reference. How do leaks happen in fragments? First, we need to...
Read more >3 Good Habits for Avoiding Memory Leaks in Objective-C
The best way to deal with Objective-C memory leaks is to stop them before they start. Here are 3 good development habits that...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
Yeah, we can close it now that #9224 was resolved.
@Tanya-Solyanik should this be closed now?