为什么不删除事件侦听器的工作？ [英] Why doesn't removing event listeners work?

问题描述

我有这个在我的构造函数：

I have this in my constructor:

addEventListener(Event.REMOVED_FROM_STAGE, actualDestroy);

和这actualDestroy：

And this in actualDestroy:

    public function actualDestroy(e:* = null){
        removeEventListener(Event.REMOVED_FROM_STAGE,actualDestroy);
        if(this.parent){
            this.parent.removeChild(this);
        }
    }

现在的问题是我得到的错误：错误＃2094：事件调度递归溢出。为什么removeChild之不断得到所谓的，如果this.parent不存在？为什么不删除事件侦听器的工作？

The problem is I get Error: Error #2094: Event dispatch recursion overflow. Why does removechild keep getting called if this.parent does not exist? Why doesn't removing event listeners work?

推荐答案

本次活动的名称是一种误导。 removedFromStage ，根据文档，是时调度显示对象是关于从显示列表中删除。换句话说，这是发生了什么事在code：

The name of the event is misleading. removedFromStage, according to the docs, is "dispatched when a display object is about to be removed from the display list". In other words, this is what's happening in your code:

1. 放在你的code，你叫 parent.removeChild（本）
2. actualDestroy 立即调用。在这一点上，<​​STRONG>的对象仍然显示列表中，所以 this.parent！= NULL
3. 在 actualDestroy ，你叫 parent.removeChild（本）试。
4. 转到步骤2

1. Somewhere in your code, you call parent.removeChild(this)
2. actualDestroy is immediately called. At this point, the object is still in the display list, so this.parent != null
3. In actualDestroy, you call parent.removeChild(this) again.
4. Go to step 2

因此​​，要解决这个问题，你可能需要重构你的code（一个对象从显示列表中删除本身是不是一个好主意无论如何），或者使用一些布尔像 beingRemoved 来检查对象是否被从列表中删除了。在这种情况下，不叫 parent.removeChild（本）在 actualDestroy 。

So to fix the issue, you might want to refactor your code (an object removing itself from the display list is never a good idea anyway), or perhaps use some boolean like beingRemoved to check whether the object is being removed from the list already. In which case, don't call parent.removeChild(this) in actualDestroy.

这篇关于为什么不删除事件侦听器的工作？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！