Re: Clarification on accessors? (was: Yet another memory management question)
Re: Clarification on accessors? (was: Yet another memory management question)
- Subject: Re: Clarification on accessors? (was: Yet another memory management question)
- From: Erik Buck <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 18:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
What about properties that aren't backed by instance variables? Accessors are still needed to set properties stored in an auxiliary dictionary etc. There are literally only hours left for me to change a recommendation in "Cocoa Design Patterns" that you SHOULD use accessors in initializers and -dealloc. Remind me again why I shouldn't ?
--- On Wed, 7/8/09, Bill Bumgarner <email@hidden> wrote:
From: Bill Bumgarner <email@hidden>
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessors? (was: Yet another memory management question)
To: "Sean McBride" <email@hidden>
Cc: "Erik Buck" <email@hidden>, email@hidden
Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 7:23 PM
On Jul 8, 2009, at 1:40 PM, Sean McBride wrote:
On 7/8/09 11:20 AM, Erik Buck said:
>> The bottom line is that accessors are the only way to set synthesized
>> instance variables to nil in the modern (64bit) Objective-C runtime.
> True. But if I remember previous discussions correctly, that's a bug,
> not a feature.
Correct. 'Tis a bug. A fixed one, too, if you have access to the Snow Leopard seeds or grab the clang compiler from the llvm.org repository.
b.bum
_______________________________________________
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