Bob Lee wrote:
> I don't understand what you're getting at.
>
> The problem is that we have a strong reference chain from Thread ->
> MyRunnable -> MyRunnable's Class -> Application ClassLoader.
The GC root in this case is the Thread, right? I am saying that if you
shut down the Thread then the application ClassLoader would no longer be
strongly reachable and all associated Soft/WeakReferences and
ReferenceQueue would get garbage-collected properly.
> FRQ is actually in Google Collections, not Guice.
>
> I think I'd use my code above before I'd add a shutDown() method to the
> API...
This issue affects more than just Guice. Any code depending on Google
Collections would potentially suffer from this memory leak while running
under a web container. Look, I don't understand the reluctance. Did I
fail to provide a good use-case? Did I say something wrong?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We're sympathetic. I don't like the idea of Guice having consequences
> on deployment. Or redeployment.
>
> Perhaps we could clean up the FRQ code by moving classloading to its
> own helper class. This would make that code testable, and perhaps
> worthy of inclusion...
I would really appreciate any effort you make to this end. Please let
me know if there is anything more I can do to help.
Thank you,
Gili
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"google-guice" 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/google-guice?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
