Memory leak (closing image editor)

[xnview]

Instead, probably the best way to call such an option is “Limit application to a single viewer when tabs are hidden”.

you have already 'Interface>Maximum of view tabs'

[jkm]

you have already 'Interface>Maximum of view tabs'

Good point, I'd forgotten!

It's actually in Interface:Tabs:Maximum of view tabs.

Easier and better than binding cmd_close to a mouse button or adding a toolbar button.

That's exactly what they should be using. No further enhancement is necessary.

[Wormwood]

I was just about to mention that option, this is definitely the best solution. I set it to 1 the other day, and it does exactly what I wanted to.

[jkm]

I was just about to mention that option, this is definitely the best solution. I set it to 1 the other day, and it does exactly what I wanted to.

Ah, if you knew about it why weren’t you using it before?

There are a lot of options. Even Pierre has forgotten some!

It’s great that the program is so configurable. A bit of confusion is sometimes the price we pay.

[Wormwood]

I completely forgot about it since I thought that 'Tab -> Hide' did the same thing! After realizing this was not the case I went through the settings again, I vaguely remembered that a tab limit already existed and then found the Maximum of view tabs option and was like d'oh !

It's easy to forget something that simple when you're confused, especially with so many options. But yeah, it's still great that the program has practically everything that one may need, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

[nji9]

... especially with so many options. But yeah, it's still great that the program has practically everything that one may need...

In principle I do agree.
However...
Glad Airbus firmware blocks loops. Can't say the same for boing as it seems.
If you know what I mean.

you have already 'Interface>Maximum of view tabs'

This does it!
This option prevents XnViewMP to accumulate mem (until crash).
I will use it.

But there is one point:

I strongly suspect I'm not the only user...
- editing/ viewing images one by one.
- so don't need tabs shown (require unnecessarily room), so hide it
- do not notice that mem usage accumulates

(As @jkm already successfully mentioned) I use XnViewMP since
about 5 years (from time to time, for special uses),
and didn't notice mem accumulation; only crashes from time to time.
So: new or occasional users propably won't too.
How can this be taken into account?

An idea:
When installing, ask for "single/ multiple image mode" (can be changed later).
In multiple image mode always show tabs.
Moreover there's that... option which lets XnViewMP keep mem
for last closed image. Maybe it should be deactivated (by default) and
by switching to tab=1, i.e. single image mode?

[xnview]

I strongly suspect I'm not the only user...
- editing/ viewing images one by one.
- so don't need tabs shown (require unnecessarily room), so hide it
- do not notice that mem usage accumulates

Perhaps a warning dialog when you choose to hide tabs?

[nji9]

Perhaps a warning dialog when you choose to hide tabs?

... hmm... no... (I hope you don't mind my impression ).

To me that seems like warning users that the app can explode if you hit some button
What I mean:
Over time users probably will forget having hidden the tabs.
Warning for a poor implemention doesn't seem right to me; better make it... better.

However IMHO there is need for action due to the argument I mentioned above
("I strongly suspect I'm not the only user...")

[jkm]

A warning that "tabs remain open even if tab handles are hidden" is more than adequate.

Two users in so many years is not an epidemic.

Calls for "action" without suggesting what action are useless. The definitive alternative to a warning would be to actually impose a limit: 1 viewer instance if tabs are hidden. And some people are not going to like that.

Another alternative would be to show a list of open tabs on the View->Tab menu. The problem with that options is that users will ignore it and not look. They think they know how the app works, but they don't, and so they won't bother to check the View->Tab menu either. And eventually some user will complain about the same "problem".

Personally, I don't see the need for the ability to permanently hide tabs, and it would be just fine with me if that menu option were just removed. And that would also quite neatly solve this problem for people who don't understand how the tabs work. But again, some other users won't like that option either.

So I agree Pierre that a warning is probably the most all-around agreeable option, if you want to do anything at all.

I think that this is a matter primarily of documentation and education. But without that, a warning when tabs are turned off is a start.

[user0]

I strongly suspect I'm not the only user...
- editing/ viewing images one by one.
- so don't need tabs shown (require unnecessarily room), so hide it
- do not notice that mem usage accumulates

Perhaps a warning dialog when you choose to hide tabs?

I see no issue here and no any popups required
it is obvious that if you hide tabs' header - new images will still open new tabs and if you never close them/app or have session enabled they will accumulate

however, since there is Session menu - you can show open tabs there
viewtopic.php?t=50511

[nji9]

...it is obvious that if you hide tabs' header - new images will still open new tabs and if you never close them/app or have session enabled they will accumulate...

Concerning "obvious":

IMHO it is obvious that feedback of kind of "everything is fine as it is now"
will come from users who got used since long the unusual hidden tab accumlation.
But (as already posted) I suspect that most new or occasional users
(editing only one image) won't be aware of mem accum (until crash).
These latter users won't appear in this thread - I suspect.
But who knows?