• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: A coding pattern that does not work under Garbage Collection
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A coding pattern that does not work under Garbage Collection


  • Subject: Re: A coding pattern that does not work under Garbage Collection
  • From: John Stiles <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 09:54:55 -0800

If you aren't averse to ObjC++, there's always the traditional C++ solution for a block of memory that has a controlled lifetime:

vector<float> myData(size);
float *myPointer = &myData[0]; // or just use myData directly, it will work the same as a C array in the majority of cases


Then myData should last until it falls out of scope. This is easier than malloc because you don't have to worry about edge cases where you fail to free it properly (e.g. calling return in the middle of a function).

Only thing I'm not sure about—if you raise an ObjC exception, I don't know if myData would be leaked. Not sure how well ObjC++ exceptions handle C++ cleanup.


On Nov 9, 2007, at 7:39 AM, Rick Hoge wrote:


I've been testing some of our older libraries under GC, and have found one coding pattern (that may well have been bad practice anyway) that really does not work well under GC.


I used to use convenience constructors for NSMutableData objects as a kind of lazy replacement for malloc.

That is, an assignment like this:

float *myPointer = [[NSMutableData dataWithLength:size*sizeof (float)] mutableBytes]; // Memory freed at end of event loop

could be used in place of

float *myPointer = (float*)malloc(size*sizeof(float)); // Needs a free() later

The advantage of the first, under traditional memory management, was that the memory would presumably be cleaned up at the end of the current event loop (whereas the second would require a malloc downstream in the code).

It seems like this (not surprisingly) doesn't work reliably under GC, as the collector obviously has no way of knowing that you are later looking at the memory originally addressed by myPointer. It keeps track of objects and not pointers.

One possible solution is to replace the first assignment with

NSMutableData *myData = [NSMutableData dataWithLength:size*sizeof (float)];

and use

 ((float*)[myData mutableBytes])  in place of myPointer.

The other option is to just use malloc/free pairs - which I don't mind to a certain extent but the autoreleased convenience constructor was nice when there were a lot of little chunks of data to allocate which would not be needed after the end of the event loop. I guess the concept of a convenience constructor no longer has the same significance it did pre-GC.

As there are probably better ways of approaching this kind of situation, I'd be interested in any suggestions or comments. The way I was doing it before was probably just bad... still this explained a few spooky bugs in one of our apps under GC.

Cheers,

Rick
_______________________________________________

Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)

Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com

Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
40blizzard.com


This email sent to email@hidden

_______________________________________________

Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)

Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com

Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: A coding pattern that does not work under Garbage Collection
      • From: "Clark Cox" <email@hidden>
    • Re: How to talk with a kernel extension?
      • From: Jean-Daniel Dupas <email@hidden>
References: 
 >A coding pattern that does not work under Garbage Collection (From: Rick Hoge <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: SenTestingKit fails when using CG-Only
  • Next by Date: spoofing NSEvents vs. abstracting out non-coalesced mouse dragged events
  • Previous by thread: Re: A coding pattern that does not work under Garbage Collection
  • Next by thread: Re: How to talk with a kernel extension?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread