•
•
•
•
What is DaniWeb IT Discussion Community?
You're currently browsing the Java section within the Software Development category of DaniWeb, a massive community of 427,228 software developers, web developers, Internet marketers, and tech gurus who are all enthusiastic about making contacts, networking, and learning from each other. In fact, there are 2,196 IT professionals currently interacting right now! Registration is free, only takes a minute and lets you enjoy all of the interactive features of the site.
Please support our Java advertiser: Lunarpages Java Web Hosting
Views: 454 | Replies: 10
 |
•
•
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 44
Reputation: 
Rep Power: 1
Solved Threads: 0
Light Poster
Is there a way to make a frame totally wipe all traces of itself (make it return null) by pressing the X on the window?
setDefaultCloseOperation(DISPOSE_ON_CLOSE);
doesn't actually make the frame return null, rather, it saves its state and cleans it out of memory... A call to show or pack will bring it back...... I want it gone!
Any ideas?
setDefaultCloseOperation(DISPOSE_ON_CLOSE);
doesn't actually make the frame return null, rather, it saves its state and cleans it out of memory... A call to show or pack will bring it back...... I want it gone!
Any ideas?
•
•
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,460
Reputation:
Rep Power: 9
Solved Threads: 131
So don't call setVisible(true) (show is deprecated).
Really, as long as your frame isn't a instance variable (or even worse class variable) in a class that is always active, it will, eventually, be garbage collected as soon as it is has gone out of scope and been disposed. If you feel you absolutely must "kill" it, then you can't simply use the "defaultCloseOption", you have to write your own WindowListener and "kill" it in the windowClosing/windowClosed method (if you want the event model to do it for you).
Really, as long as your frame isn't a instance variable (or even worse class variable) in a class that is always active, it will, eventually, be garbage collected as soon as it is has gone out of scope and been disposed. If you feel you absolutely must "kill" it, then you can't simply use the "defaultCloseOption", you have to write your own WindowListener and "kill" it in the windowClosing/windowClosed method (if you want the event model to do it for you).
Java Programmer and Sun Systems Administrator
----------------------------------------------
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
--Brian Kernighan
----------------------------------------------
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
--Brian Kernighan
•
•
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 44
Reputation:
Rep Power: 1
Solved Threads: 0
Light Poster
Well, I have my main program in a JFrame and then another class that extends JFrame in a totally different .java file..
In the main program, I can set the 2nd JFrame = to null any time which does what i want, BUT pressing the X on the frame can either hide it, dispose it (which doesn't set it to null), or do nothing.....
You would think calling dispose() on the frame would simply set it to null and have it garbage collected, but it doesnt... Actually, I'm not so sure what it does...
In the main program, I can set the 2nd JFrame = to null any time which does what i want, BUT pressing the X on the frame can either hide it, dispose it (which doesn't set it to null), or do nothing.....
You would think calling dispose() on the frame would simply set it to null and have it garbage collected, but it doesnt... Actually, I'm not so sure what it does...
•
•
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,460
Reputation:
Rep Power: 9
Solved Threads: 131
Right, it doesn't. It does destroy the all of the event threads references to it, but if you still hold one, it will still exist. The event thread cannot do anything about the references you hold.
Like I said, you will have to write your own WindowListener.
Like I said, you will have to write your own WindowListener.
Java Programmer and Sun Systems Administrator
----------------------------------------------
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
--Brian Kernighan
----------------------------------------------
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
--Brian Kernighan
•
•
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 44
Reputation:
Rep Power: 1
Solved Threads: 0
Light Poster
So what can I put in the windowListener's windowClosing() method to make it totally get rid of the entire instance?
The problem is, I want the class to be self sustaining... I don't want to have to overwrite the windowListener through my main program just so I can set it equal to null that way...
I want to call a method, that does more than dispose() which kills everything, setting it to null...
The problem is, I want the class to be self sustaining... I don't want to have to overwrite the windowListener through my main program just so I can set it equal to null that way...
I want to call a method, that does more than dispose() which kills everything, setting it to null...
•
•
Join Date: May 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,847
Reputation: 
Rep Power: 12
Solved Threads: 283
Why are you so concerned that it's not explicitly null? dispose() is sufficient for all practical purposes that I can think of
•
•
•
•
Releases all of the native screen resources used by this Window, its subcomponents, and all of its owned children. That is, the resources for these Components will be destroyed, any memory they consume will be returned to the OS, and they will be marked as undisplayable.
•
•
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,460
Reputation:
Rep Power: 9
Solved Threads: 131
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Ezzaral 
Why are you so concerned that it's not explicitly null? dispose() is sufficient for all practical purposes that I can think of
Yes, it is, but sometimes it's just not worth it to argue the point. ;-)
I believe he doesn't realise that to call pack and setVisible(true) on the reference again, will simply "rebuild" the frame. ;-)
Java Programmer and Sun Systems Administrator
----------------------------------------------
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
--Brian Kernighan
----------------------------------------------
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
--Brian Kernighan
•
•
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 44
Reputation:
Rep Power: 1
Solved Threads: 0
Light Poster
Because I have other code in my program that checks if(frame2 == null)... and having the X dispose() does not make it = null.. It just hides it there until you bring it up again...
Is there a way to ask if a frame has been disposed because I could use that instead...
The most important thing is to have the frame not take up memory while it's not in use and to have a method of finding out when the frame is available and not available... To me, the best option sounded like setting it = to null...
See where I'm getting at?
Is there a way to ask if a frame has been disposed because I could use that instead...
The most important thing is to have the frame not take up memory while it's not in use and to have a method of finding out when the frame is available and not available... To me, the best option sounded like setting it = to null...
See where I'm getting at?
Last edited by TheWhite : Jul 11th, 2008 at 8:18 pm.
•
•
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: WA, USA
Posts: 778
Reputation:
Rep Power: 4
Solved Threads: 76
Master Poster
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by TheWhite
Because I have other code in my program that checks if(frame2 == null)... and having the X dispose() does not make it = null.. It just hides it there until you bring it up again...
Is there a way to ask if a frame has been disposed because I could use that instead...
The most important thing is to have the frame not take up memory while it's not in use and to have a method of finding out when the frame is available and not available... To me, the best option sounded like setting it = to null...
See where I'm getting at?
If you're modifying the frame through an extension, why not make your frame have a boolean data type to determine if it has been disposed of or not--
java Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
--and override the method dispose such that when called it will set the boolean to true--
java Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
it may also help to have this data type returnable--
java Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
--with this you don't lose the functionality of dispose and have a way of determining if dispose has been called.
Now you can use this for your condition--
java Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
Edit: You'll obviously have to use extended frames for your references instead of the frame itself. Example--
java Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
instead of...
java Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
Last edited by Alex Edwards : Jul 11th, 2008 at 8:32 pm.
|
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DaniWeb Java Marketplace
•
•
•
•
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
- Search Method help needed!!! (Java)
Other Threads in the Java Forum
- Previous Thread: help in line numbering system
- Next Thread: error message help!
