On 2012-11-06 16:32, eskimo wrote:
I've not read the code and I'm not 100% sure of the intentions of
std.signal but why not just call the delegate as is?
Signals are a way of a very loose coupling of components. This loose
coupling is the reason why people usually expect weak reference
semantics from signals. So people expect a signal connection to simply
vanish when the observer object dies, instead of keeping it alive
because it holds a reference to it.
The solution at the moment is to hold a reference to the object in
memory not seen by the gc. So it gets destroyed if no one else holds a
reference. But to avoid calling a dead object's method the signal needs
to be notified about this, which is currently only possible for objects.
(so no generic delegate support)
The only reason why a simple delegate is not enough, is the weak
reference semantics. If it was not for that, a signal would just be a
simple array of delegates.
Aha, I see, that was the small detail I had missed. Thanks for the
explanation.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
