On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 22:11:12 GMT, Andy Goryachev <ango...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Thank you for explanations, @hjohn . >> >> This *might* work for Skins, of course, though it is not exactly what is >> needed for Skins (I will explain why in >> https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/908 because of context). >> >> In the context of this PR, I can see how a memory leak can be created when a >> developer has the `active` property as long lived and that would prevent the >> whole chain from being collected. An example would be trying to attach to >> the Window.showingProperty(), adding listeners that reference Nodes that are >> supposed to be GC'd when removed from the said window (dynamically creating >> detail panes as response to selection event, for example). >> >> I think what you propose here is good, but, as any other place where >> listeners are added, must be used with caution (may be reflect that fact in >> javadoc?) > > And, more specifically, is there a way to break the strong reference between > the `active` property and the dependent fluent chain? Also, using your example above, it might be too easy to create a memory leak by inadvertently referring to a long lived object: getSkinnable().textProperty().when(active).addListener((src,prev,current) -> { getSkinnable().setSomething(window.getSomething() + "..."); // window reference makes the listener lambda uncollectable, resulting in a memory leak }); ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/830
