Rules governing stack purging

[Richard Gaskin]

Trevor DeVore wrote:
> On Oct 31, 2006, at 7:59 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: 
>> That this would be the case with stacks whose destroyStack property  
>> is FALSE makes sense, but when a stack's destroyStack is TRUE this  
>> is inconsistent with other behaviors we've come to expect from the  
>> engine.
...
> I'm not sure I understand why a stack should not be brought into  
> memory and stay in memory until told otherwise when accessing it  
> using the complete filenmae.  destroyStack docs state that it applies  
> when a stack is closed.  Since the stack is never officially opened  
> (no go stack, no msg sent) it is not closed so in my mind it should  
> remain in memory.

By default it would work exactly as it does now.

By default, the engine creates stacks with their destroyStack property 
set to false.

The destroyStack property is used to govern whether a stack remains in 
memory when using "go" or "open", but it not honored when a property 
within a stack is accessed.

By honoring the destroyStack property consistently, accessing properties 
of stacks which have this set to true would cause the engine to read the 
file, obtain the data, dispose of the copy of the stack in memory, and 
return the value requested.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  ___________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com