hi
Frank Barknecht wrote:
Funny: I was also thinking about how this may affect to singletons recently.
that's the inevitable "great minds..." ;-)
Anyway one thing we should probably keep in mind: The problems we talk about only occur for objects, that are trying to delete themselves, that want to commit suicide. So we don't need to think too much about "passive" objects that cannot do anything anyway, about objects that don't have outlets and aren't senders. [table] currently seems to be such an object, that can only be killed from the outside.
right, i was thinking too simple: flagging "meta"-objects (e.g. abstractions) as deletable; we are really talking about flagging atomic objects, which reduces the problematic cases.
but of course we never know, what exactly a singleton will be.
However it is not clear, that [table] will be such an object for all times. For example data structures already are "active" objects, that
btw, does anybody know why [table] ceased to have inlets? i still think that they were very handy....
mfg.asdr IOhannes