Posted by Igor Stasenko on Oct 23, 2009; 6:49am
URL: https://forum.world.st/Finalization-question-tp1300962p1300964.html

2009/10/23 Schwab,Wilhelm K <[hidden email]>:
> Sorry for the extra message.  Outlook - need I say more?
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have started to port some of my code that relies on Dolphin's finalization.  The idea is that one sends #beFinalizable to the object requiring finalization.  Dolphin sets a flag on the object (in its header??) that the vm later notices.  The end result is the object in question receives #finalize and cleans up its own mess; it can also "cheat death" but I doubt I have need for that level of control.
>
> My question is that the Squeak/Pharo design appears to be built on ObjetFinalizer instances that are associated with finalizable objects, each recording what to do when an object expires.  If that's true, then I'm wondering why objects understand #finalize.  That seems to conflict with #toFinalize:send:to:with:, which looks like it expects just enough information to do the cleanup for the expired object.
>

you can use #add:executor: and provide a custom executor for object.
An ObjectFinalizer  just a generic class provided for convenience.
Anyways, all of this stuff ends up in WeakRegistry, so its a question
of personal taste, what to use.

Or, if you think you are hardcore, you can write own class which
provides finalizatin services.
Then you can add it to:
WeakArray addWeakDependent: yourStuff.

And at each GC cycle, when finalization process will awake, your
object will receive #finalizeValues mesasge,
where you free to choose what to finalize and how.



--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project