Me'z got a _little_ doubt...
Taking Irv's example, suppose I use a local variable instead of a property variable like this: -- Parent script on new me vRef = me -- Local variable return me end new me -- Msg window gObj = new(script "Parent") gObj = void In a situation like this would I still have vRef floating around as an orphan object in memory? Pranav Negandhi New Media Applications. Learnet India Limited, Mumbai. Phone: 91-22-859 8042 Ext: 410 <snip> > Case 2) Lets say you have a parent script like this, in the new > handler, you to store a copy of "me" into a property variable "pMe" - > as Kerry originally suggested earler before recanting :) > > -- someParentScript: > > property pMe > > on new me > pMe = me -- this sets the "ref count" to 1 > return me > end > > And you create it with the following line > > someObjectReference = new(script "someParentScript") -- this sets > the "ref count" to 2 > > > Then later, as you say, you destroy the object like this: > > someObjectReference = VOID -- in an attempt to the object > > But ... the object isn't destroyed because pMe still holds a > reference to the object. The ref count just goes from 2 down to 1. > > Now, unfortunately, you have an "orphaned" object. There is this > object lying around taking up memory, but you cannot get to it > because there while there still is an object reference - there is no > way you can get to it.<snip> [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
