On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Streets Of Boston <[email protected]> wrote: > You are right that the enum has been initialized a second time. > But the second time is a different process (26202 != 26607). > > In other words, the first process (26202) did not see this enum being > initialized twice. The process was killed and the new process had its enum > initialized instead.
Yup, everything appears working normally here. Now, the OP (IIRC) claims to see static data members be wiped out for the same process, which is why I asked the OP for a reproducible test case for that. -- Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) http://commonsware.com | http://github.com/commonsguy http://commonsware.com/blog | http://twitter.com/commonsguy Android Training...At Your Office: http://commonsware.com/training -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
