Memory Leak when Copying/Selecting Word files

H2SO4 said:

We should probably take it up elsewhere though, to give the OP their thread back :)

Something just struck me, at the barbie:

Congratulations on your new 'Guru' badge !!!

You certainly are most deserving of it...
unlike many others here
umoh

Chuck

thefabe said:

sup3rsprt said:

kill what process? explorer?

I think an answer to this would be a great place to start with.
I also didn't expect such a response to just posting what wikipidia stated.
I should be more careful in the future i reckon. fabe

Au contraire !

Post away - that's what we're here for.

Wikipedia is not 100% accurate all the time, so we can discuss here what might
possibly be 'errors' in the "documentation".

If I'm not mistaken, anybody can edit anything on that site.

H2SO4 said:

chuckr said:

I agree with "cannot fix the leak without source code", and I believe it is technically correct:
An 'assembler' requires source code (mnemonics) as input, to generate the computer's binary op-codes, etc. as an object file for linkage, etc. to generate the .exe executable...

... through analysis of the disassembled mnemonics - with no access to the original source code.

(As a minor off-topic point, "object files" are produced by a compiler, not by an "assembler".)

Not to let this "fall through the cracks", as regards "object files" produced by an "assembler":

See this link: MASM32

( Slightly modified: )
Why Write Assembler
The simple answer is because you can. While there are very good compilers that in many instances produce good quality code when run with the right options, you are usually stuck with doing things their way where with an assembler as powerful as MASM you have a high degree of architectural freedom which you manipulate to your design advantage to produce high precision high performance code without compromise to language format or compiler designer preference.

MASM's flexibility allows the skilled programmer to target areas as diverse as dynamic link libraries for 'various programs', object modules that are linked directly into 'various programs' and of course complete executable files for task critical applications. MASM when mastered correctly put power and performance into the hands of programmers that few have ever seen and contrary to popular opinion, a modern assembler like MASM, used in conjunction with both macros and libraries, can be coded at about the same speed and reliability as 'other' code.

An even more important point here, is that with a really good disassembler,
the output mnemonics can be used as "source-code" input to an assembler,
to yield a dll or an object file.

H2SO4 said:

That still doesn't make the disassembled mnemonics the "source code" for the original executable, just as using a really good DAT recorder to grab Beethoven's 9th Symphony off the radio doesn't mean I now have access to his sheet music :)

Indeed it does, IFF the resultant binaries are identical, byte-for-byte...
(If they're not, then you'd have to tweak the mnemonics to 'fit' the original .exe binary.)

I can't believe that you, of all people, would record the Choral "off the radio"...

However, if you had a really, really, excellent "Demusiker",
and your A/D converters were of excellent quality, one would never know:



I hope it was Toscanini's version...

Tochter aus Elysium,Freude, schöner Götterfunken

Perhaps Rachmaninoff's 2nd Piano Concerto could be an early test-trial of the "Demusiker"
since it's more familiar to many people, and a little less complicated...