On Friday, June 7, 2002, at 12:50 AM, Analysis & Solutions wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 04:57:42PM -0400, Erik Price wrote:
>
>> I have a method in my class that essentially unsets an array element.
>
> Uh, I know you're a sharp guy, but I've got to ask anyway. If it's
> doing such a simpl
Hey Erik:
It's getting late, so I may not be thinking clearly...
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 04:57:42PM -0400, Erik Price wrote:
> I have a method in my class that essentially unsets an array element.
Uh, I know you're a sharp guy, but I've got to ask anyway. If it's
doing such a simple thing
Thanks Scott,
That's kind of what I thought -- that there's no cut-and-dried answer to
the question I asked. I'm actually amazed that it came out coherently
enough for someone to understand it and answer!
Your solution is a good one. On the one hand this is less modular,
since it tests for
It depends highly on what you're doing and how you're doing it :)
If somethign needs to be done *always*, just throw it into the
Object so that the user won't have to call it explicitly,
however if you want to provide fine-grained control over
how/when/why things are cleaned-up, you might want to
4 matches
Mail list logo
