> in the removed view I get ride of the listeners in the unload
event
The only 'unload' event I know of in Flex 2 is in SWFLoader. Are
your views SWFs that you're loading into a SWFLoader?
-
Gordon
________________________________________
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com]
On Behalf Of Jason Hawryluk
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
Subject:
RE: [flexcoders] Garbage collection and removeChild [Flex 2 beta
3]?
Thank you, this clears some things up. :)
I was actually
allocating memory up to 100mb and then seeing if it's
collected by letting
it sit there with no activity, and watching the process
memory usage
(couldn't think of another way).
"You can later remove a component from
a container using the removeChild()
method. If there are no references
to the component, it is eventually
deleted from memory by the garbage
collection mechanism of Flash Player."
The above taken from the doc's,
lead me to believe that there was a garbage
collection process every
(x)min's. If the player only does this when it
needs to get back memory,
then that would explain why I did not see it
collected.
What lead me
to the question was the following scenario:
I have a single component
based on the viewstack for the views, this
component listens for event
state changes in the program to load new views,
the events it gets come
from another class (think observer pattern). So with
this I can load
multiple copies of a view with different data(this is where
I seen a
problem). Even though a view was removed from the viewstack it
still
received data change events (which it listens to in order to see if
it
needs to load new data (think chain of responsibility here) where each
view
gets the event and decides if the data is destined for it (the data it
self
is just a guid that I use to reference the xml data needed to be
loaded).
The scenario may seem weird, but no object knows what data is
being accessed
except the view that is responsible for displaying
it.
If the view was really unloaded then the event should not get
through. So
now I remove a view, and in the removed view I get ride of the
listeners in
the unload event, clean up any child objects/classes/data
providers etc..
So the view >> dataprovider >> modelloader
>> etc..
>> controller >> etc..
From what I
understand from your answer is that if the view is removed, and
I clean up
the listeners and "local" references i.e. (set dataprovider and
controller
to null)
view >> dataprovider
>> controller
Then
I should be alright. Is this correct?
My original thinking was that if
it's removed to the garbage collection how
is it that it's still getting
the events? I was thinking that this was a
protected space. I can't get the
instance back from the garbage collection,
however the instance is still
very much alive and kicking.
Is this making sense? Are these correct
assumptions?
Thank you for your help.
Jason
-----Message
d'origine-----
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com]De
la
part de Gordon Smith
Envoyé : vendredi 23 juin 2006 08:30
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
Objet
: RE: [flexcoders] Garbage collection and removeChild [Flex 2 beta
3]?
> it does not seem to be collected
What are you doing
that you think should cause it to be collected? Do you
keep allocating
memory indefinitely? An object may never get garbage
collected unless the
Player decides it needs the memory.
> Should one have to remove all
objects created through the
> or just on the child being
removed?
I'm not really following your texavery >> toto >>
titi example because you
didn't explain which one you're removing. Let's
suppose you're removing toto
as a child of texavery. If you're not keeping
any references to toto or
titi, then both become eligible for garbage
collection; the fact that toto
holds a reference to its child titi doesn't
matter, because the two of them
are isolated from all other
objects.
> Is there a way to force the garbage collection clean
up,
> or destroy an object completely?
There are no APIs for
controlling garbage collection. Once there are no
references to an object,
it becomes eligible for garbage collection. It
doesn't mean that it
actually gets garbage collected.
Is your app exhibiting unbounded
memory growth to the point where it
consumes all the machine's
memory?
-
Gordon
________________________________________
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com]
On
Behalf Of Harald Dehn
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 3:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
Subject:
WG: [flexcoders] Garbage collection and removeChild [Flex 2
beta
3]?
Is there any answer to this thread? I do have the same
problems with the
garbage
collector.
________________________________________
Von:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com]
Im
Auftrag von sourcecoderia
Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. Juni 2006
18:06
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
Betreff:
[flexcoders] Garbage collection and removeChild [Flex 2 beta 3]?
From the
documents when using removeChild the removed display item is
added to the
garbage collection for later removal. However I'm
reusing component
instances and creating new instance of the same (a
sort of tabbed interface
where children are created and removed at
will.
The listeners for
the child component are removed and other objects
set to null, but; it does
not seem to be collected.
Should one have to remove all objects created
through the chain or
just on the child being removed?
I.e. if I
instantiate a class called toto through a component called
texavery and
toto creates an instance of titi do I have to unload all
objects created by
or in the children following the entire chain
texavery >> toto
>> titi
where each one unloads it's owned/created objects?
Or
is this cleaned up from the child object on down?
Is there a way to
force the garbage collection clean up, or destroy
an object
completely?
I did wait to see if it unloaded 25mins and still no change
in the
process memory usage. However I'm only at this time unloading
objects
created by the child component and not it's children's
objects.
So unload the entire chain or just the first ?
Is
removeChild working properly ?
How is this supposed to work, and are
there any best practices in
regards to
this?
Thanks,
Jason
