On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 05:32:50 -0000, David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) 

> I don't think that making use of "use" and "no" would be shorter and
> far more Perlish.  Also this allows us to switch off the
> modifications. 

Uh, why didn't  I think of that =)

> > This is getting me thinking though:
> > 
> >     $*RUNTIME.Memory.GarbageCollector.dispose($object); # force it,
> >     # even if it should be alive
> Isn't that what we have undefine(...) for?


        my Dog $spot .= new;
        my $spot_II = $spot; # another reference

        # $spot_II is undefined now, because the object was disposed


        my Dog $spot .= new;
        my $spot_II = $spot;
        undefine($spot); # still referenced by a root set member
        undefine($spot_II); # no more refs

        # the object may still be alive, if it didn't say it needed
        # timely destruction
 ()  Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418  perl hacker &
 /\  kung foo master: /me spreads pj3Ar using 0wnage: neeyah!!!!!!!!!!!

Attachment: pgpnaC1QBZzwK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to