[BUG]Morph>>updateableActionMap

rwithers12 at attbi.com rwithers12 at attbi.com
Tue Mar 19 03:19:12 UTC 2002


Ned Konz <ned at bike-nomad.com> wrote:
> On Monday 18 March 2002 04:07 pm, Bob Arning wrote:
> 
> > >I ran into the same problem with BlockClosures, and so went to
> > > MessageSends, but had to use separate WeakArrays to hold onto the
> > > arguments. However, making a weak MessageSend would be quite easy.
> >
> > That could be a bit tricky. If the arguments were held weakly, then they
> > might disappear while the MessageSend itself was still needed.
> 
> Sure, but (at least in my case) I was running into situations where the 
> references from the BlockContexts or MessageSends were the only things 
> keeping certain Morphs from being GC'd after they'd been deleted.
> 
> Ultimately, something has to hold onto the objects you're using, but you may 
> not want it to be a MessageSend.
> 
> I just think that in some cases it is handy to have a WeakMessageSend, though 
> I wouldn't want it for everything.

My problem, exactly.  I like this solution, and wonder why I didn't
think of doing it.  I have attached a pre-alpha version.  How would we
detect that an argument has gone away, I ask semi-rhetorically.  It is
entirely possible that the argument was nil.  IMHO, we have to track
which arguments are stored non-nil and throw this exception if one of
them becomes nil.

Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WeakMessageSend.2.cs
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1177 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20020318/c2f2e9d6/WeakMessageSend.2.obj


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list