Re: [sc-dev] Re: Object.addDependant / update

[James Harkins <jamshark70@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 30, 2006, at 4:33 AM, Item State wrote:

>     n = NodeWatcher.newFrom( s );
>     s = Synth.new( \default );
>     n.register( s );
>     s.addDependant({ arg obj, what; if( what ==
> \n_end, { "it died!".postln; }); });
>     s.sendBundle( 4.0, [[ "/n_free", s.nodeID ]]);

Hey sciss,

Don't forget to remove the node from the dependent dictionary using 
s.releaseDependants--otherwise, the dictionary will get cluttered up 
with useless Synth objects that will never get garbage collected. You 
can do that inside the updater function.

NodeWatcher does its own garbage collection, but dependents do not.

Come to think of it, maybe NodeWatcher-n_end should automatically kill 
dependencies on the node? I know it wouldn't break any of my usage, but 
it might be overkill.

> I mean, now I can do s.addDependant( Updater({ arg
> obj, what; ... }));

Updater automatically adds itself as a dependent. 
s.addDependant(Updater(...)) is redundant.

hjh

PS, semi off topic, why was the word "dependent" misspelled when 
creating the dependency protocol?

: H. James Harkins
: jamshark70@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: http://www.dewdrop-world.net
.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,
Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,
Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman