Would adding a RunAndTrack on the child IEC looking for a change in its 'parent' field work? That way there would be no need for down pointers...
Eric From: Remy Suen/Ottawa/i...@ibmca To: E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]> Date: 10/21/2009 09:40 AM Subject: Re: [e4-dev] How should clients be expected to dispose of IEclipseContext instances? Sent by: [email protected] On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Paul Webster <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think we've spelled out behaviour for this yet, but I would > expect if you dispose context B, context C, D, and E are also disposed > (maybe children first, then parent). If someone actually wanted to > save C,D,E they would re-parent them before disposing their parent. How would we achieve this (internally in our standard EclipseContext implementation)? A parent context has no down-pointers. Well, it might have one if it queries for IServiceConstants.ACTIVE_CHILD I suppose. Remy ---------- Remy Suen Eclipse Platform/UI Committer, Rational Team Concert Developer IBM Ottawa 613-356-5162_______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
