"Matthew Wieder" <Development@SatoriGroupInc.com> wrote in message
news:uo08oEpNEHA.4036@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> When I attempt to compile the code you suggested, I get the error that
> "Cannot implicitly convert type 'System.Xml.XmlDocument' to
> 'System.IDisposable'" If XmlDocument does not implement IDisposable,
> then perhaps there is a larger issue here that the XmlDocument never
> goes out of scope?
> thanks,
> -Matthew
>
> Kevin Yu [MSFT] wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > First of all, I would like to confirm my understanding of your issue.
From
> > your description, I understand that memory of the XmlDocument was not
> > released after using in your app. If there is any misunderstanding,
please
> > feel free to let me know.
> >
> > As far as I know, the memory has to be released automatically when the
> > object reference is out of scope. The Garbage Collection of .NET
> > framework's CLR will do this for us. If the memeory is not released,
please
> > try to use the using statement in C#, so that we can make sure that the
> > memeory is enforced to be released when out of scope. Here is an
example:
> >
> > public void Clean(string strCleanXMLPath)
> > {
> > using(XmlDocument xmlDoc = new XmlDocument())
> > {
> > xmlDoc.Load(strCleanXMLPath);
> >
> > //do some work here on the xmlDoc
> >
> > XmlTextWriter wrtr = new XmlTextWriter(strCleanXMLPathEncoding.UTF8);
> > wrtr.Formatting = Formatting.Indented;
> > xmlDoc.WriteTo(wrtr);
> > wrtr.Close();
> > xmlDoc = null;
> > }
> > }
> >
> >
> > HTH. If anything is unclear, please feel free to reply to the post.
> >
> > Kevin Yu
> > =======
> > "This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> > rights."
> >
>

Daniel Cazzulino [MVP XML] wrote:
> Any variable goes out of scope if you don't keep references to it (for
> example in some global cache).
> IDisposable is not implemented in the XmlDocument as its resources are pure
> .NET object and references that are automatically freed by the garbage
> collector.
> You don't even need to set it to null before exiting the method.
> Can you show us the full code that "leaks"?
>