Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... We should probably make it 'safe' by forcing thedestroyed PMC to be an Undef after destruction, in case something was still referring to it.
That sounds sane. Or maybe be: convert to an Undef and put a Null PMC vtable into it which would catch any further access to that PMC.
BTW shouldn't we really separate C<destroy> and C<finalize>? The latter would be overridable by user code, the former frees allocate memory.
Nope, I don't think so. There's really only one action -- "You are dead. Go clean up after yourself" -- that PMCs should be getting. There's no need to clean up memory since we do that for you automatically, and if you have to release memory back to a third-party library it's part of the cleaning up after yourself bit.
I can't really think of a reason to have two cleanup actions. Maybe I'm missing something here.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------it's like this-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
