Hi Nissim,
> I'm going to commit the bugfix portion of the patch
today. In the future, plese post separate patches for bug
> fixes, and new features.
Thanks for that - I agree that bugfixes should generally be separate - but I found the
bug in implementing the change - it didn't seem to warrant separate threads.
> Will it really be necessary to notify more than one cache finalizer
> object that an object is leaving the cache? You really just want to
> clean up the object, it just needs one object that knows how to do that.
> Chris, what do you think about changing the vector of listeners to a
> single private CacheFinalizer object, and then changing the addListener
> to setFinalizer. And get rid of the loop in the finalize method, and
> just call the method on the one finalizer (if it's not null).
I just implemented a standard event/listener pattern - it didn't seem to cost anything
to make it a vector. (It would cost less if we could use java2 collections ;-) ).
Since I only need it for 1 listener, I am happy to use your version.
Although I will not be able to do this change myself for a few weeks - I want the
user stuff to stabilise before I merge again... plus, real work must be done ;-)
Chris
---
"surely it is madness to accept life as it is and not as it could be"
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
