Trevor DeVore wrote:
On Oct 31, 2006, at 11:08 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
The destroyStack property is used to govern whether a stack remains
in memory when using "go" or "open", but it not honored when a
property within a stack is accessed.
By honoring the destroyStack property consistently, accessing
properties of stacks which have this set to true would cause the
engine to read the file, obtain the data, dispose of the copy of
the stack in memory, and return the value requested.
I guess in my mind the current behavior makes sense. I see a read of
a property as something that reads a property, bringing it into
memory if need be to complete the operation. You approach it as the
reading of the property being an open/read/close operation so
destroyStack should come into play. Is that correct?
Yes.
By its nature, the act of reading any part of a stack causes the stack
file to be read into memory, where it's parsed to obtain the requested
value.
So in essence it's another form of opening a file, and that the engine
currently leaves the file in memory reinforces this.
Accessing properties in stacks is roughly equivalent to locking messages
and opening the stack invisibly, in almost all respects except that the
stack does not appear in windows().
Given the nature of the behavior, it seems to me that anything which
causes a stackfile to be read into memory should follow the same memory
management rules.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Media Corporation
___________________________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
