Thanks again for your answer. Let me see if I understand you completely.
> If you are going to be removing existing RootPanels from the DOM implicitly > (i.e. by removing one of their parent elements), you're going to have to > call RootPanel.detachNow() on them. By removing you mean, physical removing it from the DOM without detaching it? Calling "widget.onDetach()" is enough for overcoming this orphan problems? Is so, why does the assertion not take that into account? I mean, in my case I switch the original content for some other HTML widget, like: stuff.clear(); stuff.add(otherWidget); In the clear() method it will remove the HTML widget that contains the RootPanels, such that it will properly detach all his children and as such the RootPanels. Shouldn't a RootPanel override the onDetach() method and then remove itself form the widgetsToDetach list? Isn't this what happens when calling RootPanel.detachNow(theRootPanel)? such that it can be automatically done in the onDetach() method in RootPanel. I think I am missing something :(.. Please some more details if possible, or a tinny example? I understand that a Widget should be attached to the Document body to be removed properly, but I don't understand the Assertion. Even do you signal in the Assertion that he isn't attached to the Body, you are calling onDetach() anyway, so I would say it's not important anymore, he is properly detached anyway (just like what happens in RootPanel.detachNow() ), so what's the point of this Assertion? :( -- Ed On Sep 23, 3:33 pm, "Joel Webber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you are going to be removing existing RootPanels from the DOM implicitly > (i.e. by removing one of their parent elements), you're going to have to > call RootPanel.detachNow() on them. The reason this is necessary is that > otherwise they will be "orphaned", meaning that they're out of the DOM, but > neither they nor their child widgets are aware of having been removed. This > can break a number of things, including potentially creating leaks. That's > also why the assertion in detachWidgets() is necessary -- I would prefer to > be able to throw an exception when the problem is created (i.e. when the > parent element is removed from the DOM), but there's no way to receive > notification of this. > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Ed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > He Joel, > > > Just a tinny problem I am still stuck with: > > In your example above, the replaced content, contains a few more > > RootPanels like this: > > ...> > > <div id='stuff'> > > <... stuff ...> > > <div id='rootPanela'> > > .... > > <div id='rootPanelb'> > > </div> > > <...> > > > What I do: replacing the content of id="stuff" with some HTML widget > > when the user presses a button, like you describe above. When the user > > clicks another button, I put back the original content. > > However, the original content contains some html snippets that are > > loaded with a RootPanel (for example to add some Form). > > If the user clicks a button such that the original content is > > replaced, such that the RootPanels are put aside and not attached to > > the body, the new code (I think it's even your code ;)) in RootPanel: > > detachWidgets will throw an Assert exception when the hosted browser > > is refreshed at that moment, as these Rootpanels aren't attached to > > the Body and the RootPanel will try to remove it when the window > > closes. > > > Any idea how to solve this? > > I could remove these RootPanels from the widgetsToDetach in the > > RootPanel when they are put aside, but I don't know the exact > > RootPanel beforehand and I don't like this solution as it avoids my > > code from being losely coupled... > > > Is this exception realy a possible memory leak? And might it not a bit > > too tight (the exception) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
