Re: [e4-dev] How should clients be expected to dispose of IEclipseContex

[Eric Moffatt <emoffatt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Would adding a RunAndTrack on the child
IEC looking for a change in its 'parent' field work? That way there would
be no need for down pointers...

Eric

From:	Remy Suen/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
To:	E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	10/21/2009 09:40 AM
Subject:	Re: [e4-dev] How should clients be expected to dispose of        IEclipseContext instances?
Sent by:	e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Paul Webster <pwebster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> I don't think we've spelled out behaviour for this yet, but I would
> expect if you dispose context B, context C, D, and E are also disposed
> (maybe children first, then parent).  If someone actually wanted
to
> save C,D,E they would re-parent them before disposing their parent.

How would we achieve this (internally in our standard EclipseContext implementation)?
A parent context has no down-pointers. Well, it might have one if it queries
for IServiceConstants.ACTIVE_CHILD I suppose.

Remy

----------
Remy Suen
Eclipse Platform/UI Committer, Rational Team Concert Developer
IBM Ottawa
613-356-5162_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev