[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette
From: |
David Phillip Oster |
Subject: |
Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette |
Date: |
Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:00:10 GMT |
User-agent: |
MT-NewsWatcher/3.4 (PPC Mac OS X) |
In article <oster-C482BB.11543417022007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>,
David Phillip Oster <oster@ieee.org> wrote:
> In article <m2vei1wc52.fsf@local.wv-www.com>,
> Sherm Pendley <spamtrap@dot-app.org> wrote:
>
> > - (void)setFoo:(NSObject *)value {
> > if (foo != value) {
> > [foo release];
> > foo = [value copy];
> > }
> > }
Apologies. I was assuming a matching:
- (NSObject *)foo{
return foo;
}
But, if you always write:
- (NSObject *)foo{
return [[foo copy] autorelease];
}
then my "swap" criticism doesn't apply. However, I often want access to
an object's part, not a transient copy of the part. (When I pull a
puppet's string, connected to its finger, I expect the finger to move,
not a copy of the finger, which is then immediately thrown away.)
- Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Michael Hopkins, 2007/02/17
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Michael Ash, 2007/02/17
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Sherm Pendley, 2007/02/17
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, David Phillip Oster, 2007/02/17
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette,
David Phillip Oster <=
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Sherm Pendley, 2007/02/17
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Michael Ash, 2007/02/18
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, David Phillip Oster, 2007/02/19
- Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Michael Ash, 2007/02/19
Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Michael Hopkins, 2007/02/17
Re: Alloc/dealloc etiquette, Jens Ayton, 2007/02/19