Re: Swift crash in dispatch_apply
Re: Swift crash in dispatch_apply
- Subject: Re: Swift crash in dispatch_apply
- From: "Gerriet M. Denkmann" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 11:01:06 +0700
On 8 Jul 2014, at 10:48, Roland King <email@hidden> wrote:
> Have you tried it with Beta 3?
No. Didn't know about such a thing. Will check and try again.
> I'd still recommend compiling into a piece of code, I'm still getting a lot of playground crashes and finding that a full compile is more stable.
It IS part of some code - I am not using playground. For exactly the reason you mentioned.
Kind regards,
Gerriet.
>
> On 8 Jul, 2014, at 11:36 am, Gerriet M. Denkmann <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 8 Jul 2014, at 10:03, Roland King <email@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Why are you making self unowned?
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea.
>>>> The Swift book (in the chapter "“Resolving Strong Reference Cycles for Closures”) seems to say that this is the correct way to "resolve a strong reference cycle between a closure and a class instance”.
>>>
>>> Not quite - it says unowned if the block and self have the same lifetime, else weak.
>>
>> The book says: “If the captured reference will never become nil, it should always be captured as an unowned reference, rather than a weak reference.”
>>
>> And I can think of no way how "self" = instance of my Crash class could ever become nil while its function makeCrash is running.
>>
>> Anyway: even without "[unowned self]" I always see a println() inside of deinit{} (if it is not crashing before).
>> Which might indicate that there are no evil retain-cycles taking place.
>>
>>
>> Could anybody show me some example which really needs [unowned self] or [weak self] to break a retain-cycle?
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Gerriet.
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden