@Tomizechsterson

How does having a method which removes a DOM element = a memory leak
exactly? From your message all I see is that you want to know of a way to
easily (re)add a swf to a page which is already loaded.

If you call removeSWF(), then it clears the object from the DOM / memory.
You can recreate a DOM element div and then call embedSWF() again.

A tutorial which demonstrates what you are after can be found here:
http://pipwerks.com/lab/swfobject/load-onclick/2.0/index.html
(see section titled "Using an 'onclick' event to replace a loaded SWF with
another SWF")


That being said, it seems awfully wasteful to unload / reload the entire swf
just to point to a new image to load/zoom. I would suggest you re-examine
the architecture of your swf. You could easily expose some externalInterface
methods on your swf which you could invoke from javascript to push a new
image path etc without having to unload the swf from the browser.


Please don't falsely state that SWFObject has a bug such as a memory leak
unless you can actually demonstrate an actual valid usecase.


Aran

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 5:38 AM, Tomizechsterson
<[email protected]>wrote:

>
> It seems like there's still something not right about the way this
> object handles memory.  Our web app uses swfobject to display a flash
> module that allows the user to view an image and manipulate it with
> pan, zoom, etc.  The way this works is by calling swfobject.embedSWF,
> getting the object with swfobject.getObjectById, and calling a
> function within that returned object passing in the url of the image
> to display.
>
> There doesn't appear to be any function to call that can clear the
> swfobject from memory, and allow it to be recreated again later.
> swfobject.removeSWF appears to eliminate the div that houses it
> entirely,  making any subsequent calls to swfobject.embedSWF have no
> effect, which in turn makes the object returned from
> swfobject.getObjectById return a null object.
>
> Would there be a way to add functionality to swfobject to dispose of
> it, but keep the underlying div element intact, to allow for re-
> embedding?  Unless there's another way to do this, which I'm foolishly
> missing, of course..
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"SWFObject" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/swfobject?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to