Coming from the world of managed memory, wondering what would be the proper way to clean up objects when using ARC.
For example: if declaring an instance variable in C#, .NET will allow the GC to pick it up once it leaves scope (method/loop body, etc)
What's the proper way to clean-up in Objective-C? Just set the reference/pointer to nil or call dealloc or will ARC detect that no external references are pointing to the instance once execution leaves scope and do the job for you?
ARC means "Automatic Reference Counting" and is just a way to let the compiler add the calls to retain/release/autorelease for you. It's not the same as GC but in most cases, you can consider that objects lifetime is automatically managed for you, like in GC.
If you want more information, you should read LLVM document on ARC
Last note: never call dealloc yourself. dealloc is the object's finalizer which is called once the ObjC runtime determines that the object reference count has reached 0. This method is only meant to be overriden by subclasses. In ARC mode, you generally don't need to do that, except if your object references non-object ivars that need to be finalized once the object itself is finalized.
will ARC detect that no external references are pointing to the
instance once execution leaves scope and do the job for you
Basically, yes, that's exactly what ARC will do. You don't need to clean up objects when you're using ARC; in fact, you can't (it stops you from trying to perform manual memory management).
You might want to consult the relevant discussion in my book:
http://www.apeth.com/iOSBook/ch12.html#_memory_management
It explains what's really happening behind the scenes (how memory is actually managed) and then goes on to describe how ARC shields you from most of it.
Note that (as I explain in the URL referenced above) it mostly isn't done by anything like garbage collection: it's done by inserting invisible explicit memory management throughout your code.
Well, in the past, iOS programmers were responsible for telling the system when they were done using an object that they allocated by sending the object a release message. That was done in accordance with a memory management system known as manual reference counting. As of Xcode 4.2, programmers no longer have to worry about this and can rely on the system to take care of releasing memory as necessary. This is done through a mechanism known as Automatic Reference Counting, or ARC for short. ARC is enabled by default when you compile new applications using Xcode 4.2 or later.
You can also disable ARC, in your Xcode interface, go to your main project (not main.h) your actual Xcode project, and select it, you should see a window in Xcode that displays the settings for your project, there will be one that says 'Objective-C Automatic Reference Counting' and it will be set to 'Yes', deactivate it (to 'No') and you shouldn't worry about the ARC, if you come from the world of data management and memory as you said, but keep in mind that it would be easier to you to keep updated to the iOS new features system, that are easier to the programmer to program, it just makes our life easier.
And now, the 'proper way to clean-up in Xcode' with ARC is with 'alloc' and 'init'.
With ARC in Xcode you do not need to worry for 'cleaning' that's the job of Xcode now, you just need to:
1) Create a variable.
2) Allocate.
3) Initialize.
That's it.
An example here:
int main (int argc, char * argv[])
{
#autoreleasepool {
Variable *myVariable;
// Create an instance of a Variable and initialize it
myVariable = [Variable alloc];
myVariable = [myVariable init];
// Set variable to 4/20
[myVariable setNumerator: 4];
[myVariable setDenominator: 20];
// Display the variable using the print method
NSLog (#"The value of myVariable is:");
[myVariable print];
}
return 0;
}
Just allocate and then initialize, yo do not need to do any thing else.
Keep in mind getters and setters.
Related
serial (a NSString *) is obtained using CFBridgingRelease
The file that has this code does not use ARC (-fno-objc-arc
compiler flag)
Will ARC take care of releasing this memory,
in-spite of the above flag, or it must be manually released? In
certain situation using release seems to be causing crash
(EXC_BAD_ACCESS) and the stack-trace shows some autoreleasepool
related code there.
NSString *serial = nil;
io_service_t platformExpert = IOServiceGetMatchingService(kIOMasterPortDefault,
IOServiceMatching("IOPlatformExpertDevice"));
if (platformExpert) {
CFTypeRef serialNumberAsCFString =
IORegistryEntryCreateCFProperty(platformExpert,
CFSTR(kIOPlatformSerialNumberKey),
kCFAllocatorDefault, 0);
if (serialNumberAsCFString) {
serial = CFBridgingRelease(serialNumberAsCFString);
}
IOObjectRelease(platformExpert);
}
[serial release];
You should use the static analyzer (shift+command+B or choose "Analyze" on Xcode's "Product" menu) and it will tell you precisely what's wrong. And if you click on the icon next to the error message, it will show the trail of logic as to how it concluded there was an issue:
Note, as the Transitioning to ARC Release Notes says:
__bridge_retained or CFBridgingRetain casts an Objective-C pointer to a Core Foundation pointer and also transfers ownership to you.
You are responsible for calling CFRelease or a related function to relinquish ownership of the object.
__bridge_transfer or CFBridgingRelease moves a non-Objective-C pointer to Objective-C and also transfers ownership to ARC.
ARC is responsible for relinquishing ownership of the object.
So, you really shouldn't be using CFBridgingRelease at all with non-ARC code. The CFBridgingRelease available in manual reference counting "is intended for use while converting to ARC mode only." And if you look at the definition of this function in manual reference counting code, it really does an autorelease (simulating the clean up ARC would do for you). But as the documentation says, it's only intended while actively transitioning your code base to ARC.
But, as you can see, if that's doing an autorelease, and you manually release it as well, you're over releasing.
Bottom line, if you're writing manual reference counting code and you want to transfer ownership so you'll release it later, you should use CFBridgingRetain. If you replace CFBridgingRelease with CFBridgingRetain in your snippet and re-analyze your code, the warning will go away.
If you've written manual reference counting code, don't be disheartened when you first run the static analyzer, as you may see many issues pop up. But just plug through them, one-by-one, until you get a clean bill of health.
There are two things, which look strange:
The last [serial release]; looks strange. You have passed its value with CFBridgingRelease(). If you use ARC you can't send release. If you don't use ARC, you should set serial to nil after that, but I suppose you want use its value later. So you shouldn't release it.
I don't know IOServiceGetMatchingService() but you don't own it (see Get Rule). Thus, you shouldn't release it.
Edit: As #Rob stated in a comment below. You're owner of the service object after all, and you must release it. Strange times we live in.
I'm just beginning to have a look at Objective-C and Cocoa with a view to playing with the iPhone SDK. I'm reasonably comfortable with C's malloc and free concept, but Cocoa's references counting scheme has me rather confused. I'm told it's very elegant once you understand it, but I'm just not over the hump yet.
How do release, retain and autorelease work and what are the conventions about their use?
(Or failing that, what did you read which helped you get it?)
Let's start with retain and release; autorelease is really just a special case once you understand the basic concepts.
In Cocoa, each object keeps track of how many times it is being referenced (specifically, the NSObject base class implements this). By calling retain on an object, you are telling it that you want to up its reference count by one. By calling release, you tell the object you are letting go of it, and its reference count is decremented. If, after calling release, the reference count is now zero, then that object's memory is freed by the system.
The basic way this differs from malloc and free is that any given object doesn't need to worry about other parts of the system crashing because you've freed memory they were using. Assuming everyone is playing along and retaining/releasing according to the rules, when one piece of code retains and then releases the object, any other piece of code also referencing the object will be unaffected.
What can sometimes be confusing is knowing the circumstances under which you should call retain and release. My general rule of thumb is that if I want to hang on to an object for some length of time (if it's a member variable in a class, for instance), then I need to make sure the object's reference count knows about me. As described above, an object's reference count is incremented by calling retain. By convention, it is also incremented (set to 1, really) when the object is created with an "init" method. In either of these cases, it is my responsibility to call release on the object when I'm done with it. If I don't, there will be a memory leak.
Example of object creation:
NSString* s = [[NSString alloc] init]; // Ref count is 1
[s retain]; // Ref count is 2 - silly
// to do this after init
[s release]; // Ref count is back to 1
[s release]; // Ref count is 0, object is freed
Now for autorelease. Autorelease is used as a convenient (and sometimes necessary) way to tell the system to free this object up after a little while. From a plumbing perspective, when autorelease is called, the current thread's NSAutoreleasePool is alerted of the call. The NSAutoreleasePool now knows that once it gets an opportunity (after the current iteration of the event loop), it can call release on the object. From our perspective as programmers, it takes care of calling release for us, so we don't have to (and in fact, we shouldn't).
What's important to note is that (again, by convention) all object creation class methods return an autoreleased object. For example, in the following example, the variable "s" has a reference count of 1, but after the event loop completes, it will be destroyed.
NSString* s = [NSString stringWithString:#"Hello World"];
If you want to hang onto that string, you'd need to call retain explicitly, and then explicitly release it when you're done.
Consider the following (very contrived) bit of code, and you'll see a situation where autorelease is required:
- (NSString*)createHelloWorldString
{
NSString* s = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"Hello World"];
// Now what? We want to return s, but we've upped its reference count.
// The caller shouldn't be responsible for releasing it, since we're the
// ones that created it. If we call release, however, the reference
// count will hit zero and bad memory will be returned to the caller.
// The answer is to call autorelease before returning the string. By
// explicitly calling autorelease, we pass the responsibility for
// releasing the string on to the thread's NSAutoreleasePool, which will
// happen at some later time. The consequence is that the returned string
// will still be valid for the caller of this function.
return [s autorelease];
}
I realize all of this is a bit confusing - at some point, though, it will click. Here are a few references to get you going:
Apple's introduction to memory management.
Cocoa Programming for Mac OS X (4th Edition), by Aaron Hillegas - a very well written book with lots of great examples. It reads like a tutorial.
If you're truly diving in, you could head to Big Nerd Ranch. This is a training facility run by Aaron Hillegas - the author of the book mentioned above. I attended the Intro to Cocoa course there several years ago, and it was a great way to learn.
If you understand the process of retain/release then there are two golden rules that are "duh" obvious to established Cocoa programmers, but unfortunately are rarely spelled out this clearly for newcomers.
If a function which returns an object has alloc, create or copy in its name then the object is yours. You must call [object release] when you are finished with it. Or CFRelease(object), if it's a Core-Foundation object.
If it does NOT have one of these words in its name then the object belongs to someone else. You must call [object retain] if you wish to keep the object after the end of your function.
You would be well served to also follow this convention in functions you create yourself.
(Nitpickers: Yes, there are unfortunately a few API calls that are exceptions to these rules but they are rare).
If you're writing code for the desktop and you can target Mac OS X 10.5, you should at least look into using Objective-C garbage collection. It really will simplify most of your development — that's why Apple put all the effort into creating it in the first place, and making it perform well.
As for the memory management rules when not using GC:
If you create a new object using +alloc/+allocWithZone:, +new, -copy or -mutableCopy or if you -retain an object, you are taking ownership of it and must ensure it is sent -release.
If you receive an object in any other way, you are not the owner of it and should not ensure it is sent -release.
If you want to make sure an object is sent -release you can either send that yourself, or you can send the object -autorelease and the current autorelease pool will send it -release (once per received -autorelease) when the pool is drained.
Typically -autorelease is used as a way of ensuring that objects live for the length of the current event, but are cleaned up afterwards, as there is an autorelease pool that surrounds Cocoa's event processing. In Cocoa, it is far more common to return objects to a caller that are autoreleased than it is to return objets that the caller itself needs to release.
Objective-C uses Reference Counting, which means each Object has a reference count. When an object is created, it has a reference count of "1". Simply speaking, when an object is referred to (ie, stored somewhere), it gets "retained" which means its reference count is increased by one. When an object is no longer needed, it is "released" which means its reference count is decreased by one.
When an object's reference count is 0, the object is freed. This is basic reference counting.
For some languages, references are automatically increased and decreased, but objective-c is not one of those languages. Thus the programmer is responsible for retaining and releasing.
A typical way to write a method is:
id myVar = [someObject someMessage];
.... do something ....;
[myVar release];
return someValue;
The problem of needing to remember to release any acquired resources inside of code is both tedious and error-prone. Objective-C introduces another concept aimed at making this much easier: Autorelease Pools. Autorelease pools are special objects that are installed on each thread. They are a fairly simple class, if you look up NSAutoreleasePool.
When an object gets an "autorelease" message sent to it, the object will look for any autorelease pools sitting on the stack for this current thread. It will add the object to the list as an object to send a "release" message to at some point in the future, which is generally when the pool itself is released.
Taking the code above, you can rewrite it to be shorter and easier to read by saying:
id myVar = [[someObject someMessage] autorelease];
... do something ...;
return someValue;
Because the object is autoreleased, we no longer need to explicitly call "release" on it. This is because we know some autorelease pool will do it for us later.
Hopefully this helps. The Wikipedia article is pretty good about reference counting. More information about autorelease pools can be found here. Also note that if you are building for Mac OS X 10.5 and later, you can tell Xcode to build with garbage collection enabled, allowing you to completely ignore retain/release/autorelease.
Joshua (#6591) - The Garbage collection stuff in Mac OS X 10.5 seems pretty cool, but isn't available for the iPhone (or if you want your app to run on pre-10.5 versions of Mac OS X).
Also, if you're writing a library or something that might be reused, using the GC mode locks anyone using the code into also using the GC mode, so as I understand it, anyone trying to write widely reusable code tends to go for managing memory manually.
As ever, when people start trying to re-word the reference material they almost invariably get something wrong or provide an incomplete description.
Apple provides a complete description of Cocoa's memory management system in Memory Management Programming Guide for Cocoa, at the end of which there is a brief but accurate summary of the Memory Management Rules.
I'll not add to the specific of retain/release other than you might want to think about dropping $50 and getting the Hillegass book, but I would strongly suggest getting into using the Instruments tools very early in the development of your application (even your first one!). To do so, Run->Start with performance tools. I'd start with Leaks which is just one of many of the instruments available but will help to show you when you've forgot to release. It's quit daunting how much information you'll be presented with. But check out this tutorial to get up and going fast:
COCOA TUTORIAL: FIXING MEMORY LEAKS WITH INSTRUMENTS
Actually trying to force leaks might be a better way of, in turn, learning how to prevent them! Good luck ;)
Matt Dillard wrote:
return [[s autorelease] release];
Autorelease does not retain the object. Autorelease simply puts it in queue to be released later. You do not want to have a release statement there.
My usual collection of Cocoa memory management articles:
cocoa memory management
There's a free screencast available from the iDeveloperTV Network
Memory Management in Objective-C
NilObject's answer is a good start. Here's some supplemental info pertaining to manual memory management (required on the iPhone).
If you personally alloc/init an object, it comes with a reference count of 1. You are responsible for cleaning up after it when it's no longer needed, either by calling [foo release] or [foo autorelease]. release cleans it up right away, whereas autorelease adds the object to the autorelease pool, which will automatically release it at a later time.
autorelease is primarily for when you have a method that needs to return the object in question (so you can't manually release it, else you'll be returning a nil object) but you don't want to hold on to it, either.
If you acquire an object where you did not call alloc/init to get it -- for example:
foo = [NSString stringWithString:#"hello"];
but you want to hang on to this object, you need to call [foo retain]. Otherwise, it's possible it will get autoreleased and you'll be holding on to a nil reference (as it would in the above stringWithString example). When you no longer need it, call [foo release].
The answers above give clear restatements of what the documentation says; the problem most new people run into is the undocumented cases. For example:
Autorelease: docs say it will trigger a release "at some point in the future." WHEN?! Basically, you can count on the object being around until you exit your code back into the system event loop. The system MAY release the object any time after the current event cycle. (I think Matt said that, earlier.)
Static strings: NSString *foo = #"bar"; -- do you have to retain or release that? No. How about
-(void)getBar {
return #"bar";
}
...
NSString *foo = [self getBar]; // still no need to retain or release
The Creation Rule: If you created it, you own it, and are expected to release it.
In general, the way new Cocoa programmers get messed up is by not understanding which routines return an object with a retainCount > 0.
Here is a snippet from Very Simple Rules For Memory Management In Cocoa:
Retention Count rules
Within a given block, the use of -copy, -alloc and -retain should equal the use of -release and -autorelease.
Objects created using convenience constructors (e.g. NSString's stringWithString) are considered autoreleased.
Implement a -dealloc method to release the instancevariables you own
The 1st bullet says: if you called alloc (or new fooCopy), you need to call release on that object.
The 2nd bullet says: if you use a convenience constructor and you need the object to hang around (as with an image to be drawn later), you need to retain (and then later release) it.
The 3rd should be self-explanatory.
Lots of good information on cocoadev too:
MemoryManagement
RulesOfThumb
As several people mentioned already, Apple's Intro to Memory Management is by far the best place to start.
One useful link I haven't seen mentioned yet is Practical Memory Management. You'll find it in the middle of Apple's docs if you read through them, but it's worth direct linking. It's a brilliant executive summary of the memory management rules with examples and common mistakes (basically what other answers here are trying to explain, but not as well).
I read that when using ARC in Objective-C programming in Xcode the dealloc method is called automatically by the compiler. Under what circumstances is it called?
In order to avoid having too many variable names, when I need to repeatedly use the same classes to do multiple operations (and resetting the variable each time) I often declare the variables, set them to nil, and then assign values to them as I go. This ends up looking like this:
MyClass mc;
mc = [[MyClass alloc] init];
[mc doThis:someOption]
mc = [[MyClass alloc] init];
[mc doThis:someOtherOption];
//etc...
The method name alloc is short for "allocate" because it is the method where memory is allocated to the variable. Does the compiler automatically release the memory for sc every time I assign it a new value? I plan on using this method in a project of mine, and I don't want a lot of memory being allocated with all the times I call alloc to assign a new value to mc.
The compiler never calls dealloc. The compiler inserts retain, release and autorelease (more efficient equivalents, really) as necessary to follow the memory management rules.
When the compiler inserts said calls is up to the compiler and the details will change across different compiler versions and different optimization levels.
I.e. you shouldn't need to worry about it in general.
However, autorelease pressure can still be an issue, as can retain cycles. Thus, you should definitely poke about your app with the Allocations Instrument to both measure the high-water mark and make sure your app isn't leaking memory over time.
I read that when using ARC in Objective-C programming in Xcode the dealloc method is called automatically
In Objective-C, you never call -dealloc directly whether or not you're using ARC.
Under what circumstances is it called?
-dealloc is called when an object's retain count drops to zero. That is, it's called when all the objects that had previously asserted "ownership" of the object (by calling +alloc or -retain or -copy or +new) have renounced that ownership (by calling -release or -autorelease).
Does the compiler automatically release the memory for sc every time I assign it a new value?
If you're using ARC (and you should be), the compiler will insert appropriate calls to -retain, -release, etc. so that memory is managed appropriately. That said, you still need to understand how memory management works, and you should be familiar with the material in Advanced Memory Management Programming Guide.
Under ARC, your variable mc will hold a strong reference to only one instance of MyClass at a time, so when you allocate the second one and assign it to the variable, the first one should be getting deallocated, assuming your doThis: method doesn't do something that will create another strong reference to that instance, or that you're not doing anything else in your code that you've omitted that will keep a strong reference.
That being said, it would be a good idea for you to run your app with Instruments to see how much memory your app uses during this. Your instances shouldn't be getting autoreleased, so you shouldn't have to worry about them remaining around until the autorelease pool is drained, but I don't know what you might being doing when you init an instance of the class, or what you might be doing in your doThis: method, so if you're concerned, it's always a good idea to profile it with Instruments for memory allocations and leaks.
I am getting a bit confused. I am creating an app with storyboard, and running it on iPad 1. the application uses a lot of memory, so reached the 120mb, crashes. accordingly to what I have understood to remove this problem you need to release, dealloc... the point is that with ARC this should be automatic. In fact if I add for e.g.: [label1 release]; it gives me an error. But this ARC automatic release and dealloc does not seem to work! Is this because there are different ways to release with ARC??
You don't need to manually retain/release/autorelease with ARC. However if you have active references to a lot of unused objects they will still remain in memory. Profile your app with Instruments and it will show you how many objects you're creating of each class and how much memory they're consuming.
With ARC you still need to think about memory usage you just don't need to worry as much about memory leaks.
NSObject *bigMemObj = [[BigMemClass alloc] init];
//This creates the object in memory. In both arc and manual counting the retain count is 1
//Do stuff
//Prior to ARC you would have had to call [bigMemObj release]; before setting the variable to nil
bigMemObj = nil
//With ARC you don't have to do anything. The compiler inserts the release at compile time
Also read the documentation on declaring iVars __strong vs __weak.
Without looking at your code it's hard to identify what is consuming all the memory but hopefully that should help you determine where to start looking.
You should implement #autoreleasePool{} inside each method. In essence, each method will look like the following:
-(void)methodName{
#autoreleasePool{
//do method stuff
}
}
This will ensure that, upon exiting the autoreleasePool, memory is properly released.
I can't vote this back up, otherwise I would. I think Alessandro is asking about ARC vs using release and dealloc, not about what he's loading!
So, Alessandro, your understanding is correct that with ARC you don't release or dealloc. Therefore, those won't work if you're using ARC. Also, there is no alternative to release/dealloc, since ARC doesn't use it.
My suggestion would be to look at what you're using in the app that is taking up all this memory. Do you have a large number of pictures, for example, that are very large? Keep any graphics as small as possible, matching the resolution of the iPad. Especially the iPad 1, which doesn't have the "retina display".
You can use Autorelease pools in ARC. Here is some documentation on when to use them:
NSAutoreleasePool Class Reference
Advanced Memory Management Programming Guide: About Memory Management
How would you write a unit test—using OCUnit, for instance—to ensure that objects are being released/retained properly in Cocoa/Objective-C?
A naïve way to do this would be to check the value of retainCount, but of course you should never use retainCount. Can you simply check whether an object's reference is assigned a value of nil to indicate that it has been released? Also, what guarantees do you have about the timing at which objects are actually deallocated?
I'm hoping for a concise solution of only a few lines of code, as I will probably use this extensively. There may actually be two answers: one that uses the autorelease pool, and another that does not.
To clarify, I'm not looking for a way to comprehensively test every object that I create. It's impossible to unit test any behavior comprehensively, let alone memory management. At the very least, though, it would be nice to check the behavior of released objects for regression testing (and ensure that the same memory-related bug doesn't happen twice).
About the Answers
I accepted BJ Homer's answer because I found it to be the easiest, most concise way of accomplishing what I had in mind, given the caveat that the weak pointers provided with Automatic Reference Counting aren't available in production versions of XCode (prior to 4.2?) as of July 23rd, 2011. I was also impressed to learn that
ARC can be enabled on a per-file basis; it does not require that your
entire project use it. You could compile your unit tests with ARC and
leave your main project on manual retain-release, and this test would
still work.
That being said, for a far more detailed exploration of the potential issues involved with unit testing memory management in Objective-C, I highly recommend Peter Hosey's in-depth response.
Can you simply check whether an object's reference is assigned a value of nil to indicate that it has been released?
No, because sending a release message to an object and assigning nil to a variable are two different and unrelated things.
The closest you can get is that assigning anything to a strong/retaining or copying property, which translates to an accessor message, causes the previous value of the property to be released (which is done by the setter). Even so, watching the value of the property—using KVO, say—does not mean you will know when the object is released; most especially, when the owning object is deallocated, you will not get a notification when it sends release directly to the owned object. You will also get a warning message in your console (because the owning object died while you were observing it), and you do not want noisy warning messages from a unit test. Plus, you would have to specifically observe every property of every object to pull this off—miss one, and you may be missing a bug.
A release message to an object has no effect on any variables that point to that object. Neither does deallocation.
This changes slightly under ARC: Weak-referencing variables will be automatically assigned nil when the referenced object goes away. That doesn't help you much, though, because strongly-referencing variables, by definition, will not: If there's a strong reference to the object, the object won't (well, shouldn't) go away, because the strong reference will (should) keep it alive. An object dying before it should is one of the problems you're looking for, not something you'll want to use as a tool.
You could theoretically create a weak reference to every object you create, but you would have to refer to every object specifically, creating a variable for it manually in your code. As you can imagine, a tremendous pain and certain to miss objects.
Also, what guarantees do you have about the timing at which objects are actually released?
An object is released by sending it a release message, so the object is released when it receives that message.
Perhaps you meant “deallocated”. Releasing merely brings it closer to that point; an object can be released many times and still have a long life ahead of it if each release merely balanced out a previous retain.
An object is deallocated when it is released for the last time. This happens immediately. The infamous retainCount doesn't even go down to 0, as many a clever person who tried to write while ([obj retainCount] > 0) [obj release]; has found out.
There may actually be two answers: one that uses the autorelease pool, and another that does not.
A solution that uses the autorelease pool only works for objects that are autoreleased; by definition, objects not autoreleased do not go into the pool. It is entirely valid, and occasionally desirable, to never autorelease certain objects (particularly those you create many thousands of). Moreover, you can't look into the pool to see what's in it and what's not, or attempt to poke each object to see if it's dead.
How would you write a unit test—using OCUnit, for instance—to ensure that objects are being released/retained properly in Cocoa/Objective-C?
The best you could do is to set NSZombieEnabled to YES in setUp and restore its previous value in tearDown. This will catch over-releases/under-retains, but not leaks of any kind.
Even if you could write a unit test that thoroughly tests memory management, it would still be imperfect because it can only test the testable code—model objects and maybe certain controllers. You could still have leaks and crashes in your application caused by view code, nib-borne references and certain options (“Release When Closed” comes to mind), and so on.
There's no out-of-application test you can write that will ensure that your application is memory-bug-free.
That said, a test like you're imagining, if it were self-contained and automatic, would be pretty cool, even if it couldn't test everything. So I hope that I'm wrong and there is a way.
If you can use the newly-introduced Automatic Reference Counting (not yet available in production versions of Xcode, but documented here), then you could use weak pointers to test whether anything was over-retained.
- (void)testMemory {
__weak id testingPointer = nil;
id someObject = // some object with a 'foo' property
#autoreleasepool {
// Point the weak pointer to the thing we expect to be dealloc'd
// when we're done.
id theFoo = [someObject theFoo];
testingPointer = theFoo;
[someObject setTheFoo:somethingElse];
// At this point, we still have a reference to 'theFoo',
// so 'testingPointer' is still valid. We need to nil it out.
STAssertNotNil(testingPointer, #"This will never happen, since we're still holding it.")
theFoo = nil;
}
// Now the last strong reference to 'theFoo' should be gone, so 'testingPointer' will revert to nil
STAssertNil(testingPointer, #"Something didn't release %# when it should have", testingPointer);
}
Note that this works under ARC because of this change to the language semantics:
A retainable object pointer is either a null pointer or a pointer to a valid object.
Thus, the act of setting a pointer to nil is guaranteed to release the object it points to, and there's no way (under ARC) to release an object without removing a pointer to it.
One thing to note is that ARC can be enabled on a per-file basis; it does not require that your entire project use it. You could compile your unit tests with ARC and leave your main project on manual retain-release, and this test would still work.
The above does not detect over-releasing, but that's fairly easy to catch with NSZombieEnabled anyway.
If ARC is simply not an option, you may be able to do something similar with Mike Ash's MAZeroingWeakRef. I haven't used it much, but it seems to provide similar functionality to __weak pointers in a backwards-compatible way.
this is possibly not what you're looking for, but as a thought experiment I wondered if this might do something close to what you want: what if you created a mechanism to track the retain/release behavior for particular objects you wanted to test. Work it something like this:
create an override of NSObject dealloc
create a CFMutableSetRef and set up a custom retain/release functions to do nothing
make a unit test routine like registerForRRTracking: (id) object
make a unit test routine like clearRRTrackingReportingLeaks: (BOOL) report that will report any object in the set at that point in time.
call [tracker clearRRTrackignReportingLeaks: NO]; at the start of your unit test
call the register method in your unit test for every object you want to track and it'll be removed automatically on dealloc.
At the end of your test call the [tracker clearRRTrackingReportingLeaks: YES]; and it'll list all the objects that were not disposed of properly.
you could override NSObject alloc as well and just track everything but I imagine your set would get overly large (!!!).
Even better would be to put the CFMutableSetRef in a separate process and thus not have it impact your program runtime memory footprint overly much. Adds the complexity and runtime hit of inter-process communication though. Could use a private heap ( or zone - do those still exist?) to isolate it to a lesser degree.