Ball, Donald A Jr (Library)
5/18/2007 3:07:00 PM
> > 3. I had vaguely thought that the default freeze
> implementation would
> > freeze all instance variables, but it does not. Is this a
> good way to
> > implement freeze? (with the exception of the incorrect
> return value?)
> No that is not a good way I am afraid. Please note that one
> cannot freeze instant variables - I have a reason to be picky
> here, I believe
> - but the objects they are referring to.
> Do you see the implications of a "deep" freeze now? The whole
> program will probably get cold feet ;) as objects just
> referenced in our object would be frozen.
Heh heh heh, that hadn't yet occurred to me, but your point's well
taken.
> However what you are doing is clever of course, you freeze
> the objects you have created as containers for other objects
> without freezing the objects the container references, do you
> see how bad it would be again if your SortedHash froze all
> contained objects?
Of course. But what I'm doing is fine, at least as far as it goes, yes,
since I have relatively simple internal data structures? If it were more
complex, it would be better to explicitly check frozen? in each of the
methods which could modify state? (which means i really ought to put in
a super call in my freeze method...)
- donald