Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
- Subject: Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
- From: Georg Tuparev <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 21:53:14 +0200
Folks,
This is very interesting -- byt academic -- discussion. I am sure many
of the not so experienced subscribers to this list are now afraid of
touching accessor methods.
Here my humble 12 years NeXTstep/Cocoa experience. In over 95% of the
cases the simplest possible solution discussed in Hillegass' book (pp.
59, "Retain, Then release") works perfectly. In the very few cases where
this does not work, you get to know it very quickly (SIGBUS is just one
expression of this knowledge). But instead of falling in the trap of
academic discussions and religious debates, better spend your time on
writing unit test.
Kirk is right to suggest the simplest way. It is a very good suggestion
indeed.
cheers
-- georg --
On Tuesday, August 6, 2002, at 07:26 PM, Kirk Kerekes wrote:
So it seems to me that there would be a point in accessors that were
sensitive to the build style -- a development build should use the most
delicate (and probably simplest) accessor pattern -- possibly even a
somewhat wrong-headed one, just to reveal issues of thread safety, etc.
The goal of testing is, after all, to break the software before the
customer ever sees it, in the hopes of making it more break-resistant.
Georg Tuparev
Tuparev Technologies
Klipper 13
1186 VR Amstelveen
The Netherlands
Mobile: +31-6-55798196
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.