On Sun, 10 Oct 2010, Igor Stasenko wrote:
A current implementation of this method
remove: oldObject ifAbsent: exceptionBlock "Remove oldObject as one of the receiver's elements."
oldObject ifNil: [ ^nil ]. ^(self protected: [ valueDictionary removeKey: oldObject ifAbsent: nil ]) ifNil: [ exceptionBlock value ]
simply removes a previously registered object from registry and voila.
Now lets get back to our discussion about multiple finalizers per object and using them in weak subscriptions etc.
Suppose i am added a socket to weak registry, and suppose i am added a weak subscription to it.
Now, if i do 'socket close' , it tells weak registry to remove it from list. And what we'll have: - socket handle is closed - socket is wiped from weak registry - but weak subscription still listed somewhere in a list of subscriptions
My suggestion is, that upon #remove:, a weak registry should notify all executors that object of interest are no longer takes part in finalization scheme, so they should not count on receiving #finalize eventually.
In other words:
remove: oldObject ifAbsent: exceptionBlock "Remove oldObject as one of the receiver's elements."
oldObject ifNil: [ ^nil ]. ^(self protected: [ | executor | executor := valueDictionary removeKey: oldObject ifAbsent: nil. executor discardFinalization. ]) ifNil: [ exceptionBlock value ]
It's only an issue with the new WeakRegistry implementation, previous implementations don't have such problem. I think changing the method as you suggested, implementing WeakFinalizerItem >> #discardFinalization as "executor := nil" and changing WeakFinalizerItem >> #finalizaValues to ignore the executor if it's nil will fix the problem. Am I right? I don't get how "multiple finalizers per object" is related to this problem at all. Levente
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project