On 08.10.2012 13:25, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 8 October 2012 13:06, Henrik Sperre Johansen
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 08.10.2012 13:03, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
IMO, lazily checking whether the image has been restarted whenever you
want to do something stinks.
Registering to be notified when image starts/stops is a lot better.
Not to mention, less error-prone.
Miss one session check that the current session is the right one
somewhere... and everything might blow up if that is the first piece of
functionality used.
True.
I did not said that my method should replace old. Sometimes lazy
initialization is not what you want.
But having no way to perform lazy initialization is even worse.
Ah, I just objected to the notion that startup lists inherently stinks,
and took the diametrical view for the sake of argument :)
Yes, lazy initialization has its uses too, but some guidelines/advice*
on when to what those uses are, and when you'd use startUp: registration
instead, is needed I think.
Notice; in most cases where such cleanup at startup is needed (sockets,
window handles, etc.), additional cleanup is needed when the object goes
out of scope during regular use, and so a registry usually exist.
Thus, your startup code isn't usually
X allInstancesDo: #something
but
X weakRegistry allEntriesDo: #someting.
which stinks a whole lot less.
Cheers,
Henry
*So in my view, to use lazy init over startUp registration, it would
need to:
- Concern instance data.
- Not need weak cleanup.
- Be containable to a single accessor
