> This is exactly why mike suggested to implement release() in > the Fl_Image class I think. > This way, we could avoid completely the need of deleting images. > a release base impl. would just delete himself in the non > shared image impl., > the shared image would do what it does now.
Implementing "release" in the base-class would at least make it consistent. Then what we tell/educate users is "always release an image object, never call delete on it" and things will work for all classes. Is that right? -- Ian SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems Limited Registered Office: Sigma House, Christopher Martin Road, Basildon, Essex SS14 3EL A company registered in England & Wales. Company no. 02426132 ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
