Re: [picocontainer-dev] Bug in DefaultPico?

Mike,

>
>> You're quite right - its lame as is.
>> What do you think it should be changed to ?  One using plain refs  
>> rather than
> integers ?
>
> I don't see why we shouldn't use plain refs.  As long as the refs  
> are cleared
> after dispose() -- I mean, perhaps something else will show itself  
> as a better
> option later, but for now, I'd take care of one step at a time.

Oh yes I remember.  It was to do with garbage collection.  If they are  
in a list/set as refs then they are likely to be prevented from being  
eligible for GC.  I can't remember why that would ever arise ... I  
mean when you'd want to dispose of CAs but not the container that  
contained them.. :-(

>
>
> I'm also thinking of moving the start, stop, and dispose operations  
> to a
> Visitor.  (The visitor doesn't have to be transient, so it would be  
> possible for
> it to keep track of what CA's and what Child containers were  
> started.)  It
> should help move several of the additional data structures sitting  
> in Pico to
> other more reusable objects.

Meh.

With Pico2 I deleted Aslak's visitor abstraction and lifecycle impl of  
it.  I did not like the way that from root it would traverse the  
entire tree.

With Pico, you can chain containers together.  Each in a parent,  
child, grandchild situation might have a different set of behaviors  
incl lifecycle.  By each Pico instance delegating to the next's  
start() methods, there a decent mechanism to subvert the traversal.  I  
think that superior - even though its slightly more code.

Regards,

- Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email