Destroy/remove object /movieclip

Hi,
how do I completly remove a movieclip that is created as a
new class.
I have an event listener that does a removeChild like this
e.target.parent.removeChild(e.target);
is this enough or do I have to 'null' the object? I can't
just do
'e.target = null' because the property is read only. Will the
internal
garbage collection do the rest for me if I have no references
somewhere
else?
TIA

That's no fun then; apparently I wasn't accurate.
The simple matter is, that garbage collection is automatic
and removes an unreferenced object when it needs to, so as long as
you remove all reference to the object you wish to remove,
including the event listener, then at some point the garbage
collection will run and empty your item from memory. Sorry for any
confusion.

Similar Messages

Cache destroy and removing objects based on filter

Hi,
I have lined up a few questions to understand the ways we can destroy/remove cache entries or cache itself on a collective basis and not just the cache.remove(key).
1. How do I remove a group of keys from the cache? Say either I know the keySet or a keySet obtained based on a filter. I can see the Java doc says namedCache also implements queryMap and that supports keySet(Filter) but unlike Map.keySet(), the set returned by this method may not be backed by the map, so changed to the set may not be reflected in the map.
http://download.oracle.com/otn_hosted_doc/coherence/353/com/tangosol/util/QueryMap.html#keySet(com.tangosol.util.Filter)
Now that also means cache.keySet().removeAll() may not work. Can we confirm that, as another article http://wiki.tangosol.com/display/COH35UG/Data+Affinity shows an example way to use entryset or keyset and shows this line:
cacheLineItems.keySet().removeAll(setLineItemKeys).
2. Is namedcache.destroy() a blocking or non-blocking? Coz in one of our tests, we created a for loop of the following code:
     a. create cache.
     b. use cache.
     c. destroy cache.
And we expected at any point of time to have only one cache to be active on the cluster, however with the 500M as the high unit, we never saw evictions and indeed saw out of memory error. We had like 100 iterations. We expected destroy cache to basically delete the cache, thereby freeing the memory on the JVM. We only had one proxy and one storage in our test.
3. Is namedcache.clear() a blocking or non-blocking call? Although this does not necessarily removes the cache, it only unmaps all the entries in the cache.

Hi,
You can remove multiple cache entries based on a filter like this...
Filter filter = ...
cache.invokeAll(filter, new ConditionalRemove(AlwaysFilter.INSTANCE));...or on a collection of keys like this...
Collection keys = ...
cache.invokeAll(keys, new ConditionalRemove(AlwaysFilter.INSTANCE));Regarding non-blocking calls, presumably for clear() I would think that the call will not return until the cache is cleared (i.e. empty) otherwise you would get all sorts of potential problems. For cache.destroy() I am not sure what state the cache will be in when the call returns. I suspect if you call this from a client it only destroys the cache locally on that client and not throughout the rest of the cluste though - but I am sure someone could confirm this.
JK

Destroy C++ Objects

Good day to all.
In my JNI experiment I have created an object on the C++ side. Meaning, my C++ class has a constructor. I have instantiated the object in my wrapper class and my Java object is "communicating" with it. (able to call methods on it).
My question is whether / how to free memory. I know that in Java if an object is not reachable the GC collects it. I know that JVM has nothing to do with C++ objects. I was told that I could add the
delete(myC++Object) in my wrapper
and it clears the object from memory.
This said, I ran a test. I create the object via JNI and call methods on it.
That works.
I call the delete method and try to call a method, it crashes as expected.
I change my test so that I create 2 objects and invoke methods on one and test the state of both to make sure that I am dealing with only one at a time.
Successful.
I then wrote some unit tests and time trial tests where I create and destroy many objects. I found that if I created and destroyed my object many times, then created it and tried to call methods on it the system crashes. If I remove all of my delete calls, the system doesn't crash.
My questions.
1) Do I have to delete objects that I create through JNI?
2) Why after many instantiations and deletions would the app crash when a method is called on the object?
(I checked the code very well to make sure that I wasn't calling on a deleted object.)
Thank you.

I think you are calling on a deleted object.

Can you destroy an object?

I have been looking around for an answer to this question a little while and have also posted on the Java .net forums too.
But Im writing a little game where things appear on the screen, then because of user interaction, they dissapear. simple enough, I have my objects stored in a sequence, that I bind to a Group{} in my main Frame.
The issue is that each of these objects get removed from the game via the *delete sequence* code segment and because they have their own timelines which does its own collision detection, the object never seems to get de-referenced and after a while I get out of memory exceptions and the game slows down to a halt.
Firstly, I added functions to stop all timelines in each element before deleting it from the sequence, but it didnt appear to work as the game still slows down.
So my question is, can you destroy an object? I just need it gone completly, and if there is a work-around, how can I be sure that it works? Currently the netbeans profiler isnt too easy to read, but that just maybe me (anyone else having issues reading the results of a JavaFX profiled app?)
Thanks for any help that you can think of...
Mark

Are you 100% certain that there are no references to the object left after you remove it from the sequence? There is no way to explicitly destroy objects in Java; and this behavior extends to JavaFX. If you check the code and you're 100% sure that no references are left hanging out there, check Jira.
[http://openjfx.java.sun.com/jira/|http://openjfx.java.sun.com/jira/]

Not appear add/remove object merged

Hi,
I have a web intelligence report with a merged, but the option does not appear add/remove object in the merged, however, supposed that this function would be enabled on the version you just updated, as mentioned in this link:
https://scn.sap.com/community/businessobjects-web-intelligence/blog/2013/03/10/what-is-new-with-web-intelligence-bi-41-part-2-core-capabilities
upgrade
BI4.1 SP1 Patch7
regards

Maybe something here will help?
[[Removing the Search Helper Extension and Bing Bar]]

About remove object

Hi ,my name Nak
I want to remove Object 3D from the scene.
But shadow and physics is don't remove.

Please help me

Explicitly destroy an object in ABAP

Hi,
i like to destroy an Object explicitly. After the paricular statment the object must be destroyed.
if i set the reference of the object to null.when the object will be deleted? immediately or during automatic garbage collection.
Thanks and regards,
Prakash.

Hi,
you can do in OLE also.
INCLUDE OLE2INCL.
DATA EXCEL TYPE OLE2_OBJECT.
CREATE OBJECT EXCEL 'Excel.Application'.
FREE OBJECT EXCEL.
in OO ABAP
FREE OBJECT <b>OBJ</b> .
here OBJ is object reference to some class.
Regards
Vijya

List implementation where remove(Object) is fast?

Does anyone know of an implementation of the java.util.List interface where the the method boolean remove(Object o) is much faster than traversing through the list until it finds the right one? Perhaps something that takes advantage of the hash code of the object being removed?
Thanks

So you want a List that acts like a Map?
Couldn't you just use a Map?
Explain your problem domain better and we shall help
you see the light.
Well no - I would simply like a List that acts like a List, and whose remove(Object) method is faster than just scanning through each element.
I only mentioned use of the hash code as one way this could be implemented. To expand on that: Currently the LinkedList class internally maintains a list of Entry objects. Each of these objects has a reference to the previous and next Entry and the 'current' list element object. The problem is that the remove(Object) method has to go through each Entry one by one, searching for a list element that equals the object to be removed. To fix this problem the list implementation could also maintain a HashMap whose 'keys' are the list elements and whose 'values' are a (secondary) list of Entry objects associated with that key. Now the remove(Object) method could use the object to be removed to look up the 'list of associated Entry objects'. The first Entry in this (secondary) list is the one that needs to be removed.
But perhaps it's best if I describe the overlying problem: I want to write a program that randomly generates integers at the rate of about 10 per second. For each integer the program should calculate how many times in the past hour that number has been generated. What's the fastest way to calculate this?

How do i destroy an object explicitly ?

I need to explicitly destroy an object ... how do i do it ?
1) set object to null
2) call finalize on the object
3) ur suggestion pls...

I need to explicitly destroy an objectNo, you don't.
... how do i
do it ?You can't.
1) set object to nullObjects are never null. Only references can be null. If you set the only reachable reference to the object to null (or to any value other than pointing at that object), then the object becomes eligible to be garbage collected. When--or if--it actually gets cleaned up is beyond your control, but it's guaranteed to happen if the memory is needed.
2) call finalize on the objectNo. Never call finalize. The GC calls it for you. (And you should rarely if ever override finalize.)
3) ur suggestion pls...Read up on Java's garbage collection so that you understand why you don't need to do this.
This article is about something else, but it starts off with a decent intro to GC. You can also google for java garbage collection tutorial or something.
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/ALT/RefObj/

How to remove objects

PLEASE How to remove objects from sidebar?
Can draw folders and files etc in sidebar, but not remove the representation n sidebar. Pulled out objects returns back immediately.
~~~~~ k.

You should be able to drag it off and "Poof" it. Have you released your mouse button?
If it's one of the standard items in Sidebar you might go to Finder > Preferences > Sidebar > and uncheck them.
-mj

Error removing object from cache with write behind

We have a cache with a DB for a backing store. The cache has a write-behind delay of about 10 seconds.
We see an error when we:
- Write new object to the cache
- Remove object from cache before it gets written to cachestore (because we're still within the 10 secs and the object has not made it to the db yet).
At first i was thinking "coherence should know if the object is in the db or not, and do the right thing", but i guess that's not the case?

Hi Ron,
The configuration for <local-scheme> allows you to add a cache store but you cannot use write-behind, only write-through.
Presumably you do not want the data to be shared by the different WLS nodes, i.e. if one node puts data in the cache and that is eventually written to a RAC node, that data cannot be seen in the cache by other WLS nodes. Or do you want all the WLS nodes to share the data but just write it to different RAC nodes?
If you use a local-scheme then the data will only be local to that WLS node and not shared.
I can think of a possible way to do what you want but it depends on the answer to the above question.
JK

Dynamically removing objects

Hi all,
I am trying to remove objects at run time using a delete button but I keep getting an error saying
"no capability to write children". I have set the detach() capability on the Branch Group for adding the object and have set all the relevant capabilities(as far as i can see).
I can add objects at run time to the scene but cant figure out why I keep getting this error.??
Any help would be gratefully accepted.
Cheers,
Dave

I'll assume you have something similar to this:
Group g
|-----> Other stuff
\-----> BranchGroup bg
g must have the capability Group.ALLOW_CHILDREN_WRITE set. bg must have the capability BranchGroup.ALLOW_DETACH set.
Then, you remove bg like this:
g.removeChild(bg);

How destroy an object in a bsp?

Hi, I need destroy an object in a bsp, but i don't know do it.
¿How can i do it?
regards.

I did it, but don't solve the problem, i have the next source:
data: empleado_aux TYPE REF TO z_cl_pid_ii_empleado
CREATE OBJECT empleado_aux.
FREE OBJECT empleado_aux.
When i do sintax check, return the next error message:
¡ can not be a table, a reference, a string, or containe any of these objects!

Collection: add(E), remove(Object)

Hello, all!
First of all, I guess very strange see interface collection with
add(E) and remove(Object)... Why is there such collision?
LinkedList<String> list = new LinkedList<String>();
Object o = null;
list.remove(o);NetBeans shows a warning for the last line: Expected type String, actual type Object.
Eclipse and java compiler do not point to it. So how can I understand this? Netbeans fixed remove(Object) to remove(E)?
Can you please help to understand the collision?

mfratto wrote:
The only warning I get in netbeans is to assign the return value, a boolean, to a new variable.I use netbeans 6.7. Probably, You use another version of netbeans from me, so you do not get the same warning.
[see screenshort of the netbeans warning|http://i055.radikal.ru/0907/b2/6203e7e22d79.jpg]
But what that warning is saying is that you declared the LinkedList to contain String objects, but you are trying to remove an Object (which is a parent of String). You can do that, it's just weird to do so. Why wouldn't you just pass a object, a String in this case, of the same type back into list.remove()?
Edited by: mfratto on Jul 23, 2009 5:42 PMwithout sense, I just would like to understand netbeans behavior and "collision" of add(E) and remove(Object) methods.
Edited by: aeuo on Jul 23, 2009 8:47 PM the screenshort was changed to more illustrative one

LinkedList.remove(Object) O(1) vs O(n)

The LinkedList class documentation says the following:
"All of the operations perform as could be expected for a doubly-linked list. Operations that index into the list will traverse the list from the beginning or the end, whichever is closer to the specified index."
Typically one expects the remove operation from a linkedlist to be O(1). (for example [here on wikipedia|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_list] )
This is in theory true however typically in the implementation of a LinkedList internally nodes (or Entry<E> in the case of the java implementation) are made that are wrappers around the actual objects inserted in the list. These nodes also contain the references to the next and previous nodes.
These nodes can be removed from the linked list in O(1). However if you want to remove an a object from the list, you need to map it to the node to be removed. In the java implementation they simply search for the node in O(n). (It could be done without searching but this would require some mapping which requires more memory.)
The java implementation can be seen here:
    public boolean remove(Object o) {
        if (o==null) {
            for (Entry<E> e = header.next; e != header; e = e.next) {
                if (e.element==null) {
                    remove(e);
                    return true;
        } else {
            for (Entry<E> e = header.next; e != header; e = e.next) {
                if (o.equals(e.element)) {
                    remove(e);
                    return true;
        return false;
    }It seems to be a common misconception that this method runs in O(1) while it actually runs in O(n). For example [here in this cheat sheet|http://www.coderfriendly.com/2009/05/23/java-collections-cheatsheet-v2/] and [in this book|http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596527754/]. I think quite a lot of people think this methode runs in O(1). I think it should be made explicitly clear in the documentation of the class and the method that it runs in O(n).
On a side note: the remove() operation from the LinkedList iterator does perform in O(1).

I agree. It's not at all clear what the objection here is.
To add to Jeff's answer: the remove operation on the LinkedListIterator is O(1) because you don't have to search for the node to unlink - the iterator already has a pointer to it.
I tend to think of two different operations:
- unlink - an operation specific to a linked datastructure which removes a given node from the datastructure and completes in O(1)
- remove - an operation which searches for a given object in the data structure and then removes the node containing that object (using the unlink operation in the case of a linked datastructure). The performance of this depends on the performance of the search and unlink operations. In an unsorted linked list (e.g. the Java LinkedList) the search operation is O(n). So this operation is O(n).

Destroy/remove object /movieclip

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for