I have three NSString properties declared like this:
#property(nonatomic,retain) NSString *currentPassword;
#property(nonatomic,retain) NSString *newPassword;
#property(nonatomic,retain) NSString *confirmPassword;
I initialize them in a viewDidLoad method:
currentPassword = [[NSString alloc]init];
newPassword = [[NSString alloc]init];
confirmPassword = [[NSString alloc]init];
The funny thing is that they are the same object after initialize them as different objects!
Is this some kind of compiler optimization?
Thank you
Is this some kind of compiler optimization?
Not quite. It's a special case value for a constant, and an optimization of a common concrete immutable type/value which has been implemented by the NSString class.
NSString is immutable. There's no reason multiple instances of the same empty string are needed. In such simple cases, -[NSString init] can take the form:
static NSString* const EmptyNSString = #"";
- (id)init
{
self = [super init];
[self release];
return EmptyNSString;
}
similarly, + [NSString string]:
+ (id)string
{
return EmptyNSString;
}
So there are a few static immutable objects which are used this way where it makes sense. Other obvious examples include + [NSArray array] and + [NSNumber numberWithBool:].
Each one of these constants can represent what would have been many many many thousands of unique allocations produced during your program's execution.
This happens to work because NSString as a class cluster: You are returned an object of one of many opaque types which implements the interface declared by NSString. Therefore, a NSMutableString type could then implement init appropriately:
- (id)init
{
self = [super init];
if (nil != self) { ... }
return self;
}
Finally, you should in almost all cases declare your NSString properties as copy.
As NSString objects are immutable (i.e. cannot be changed after they are created) and there's no sense in creating several different instances of the same immutable strings, system tries to reuse existing objects whenever possible.
Using constructor with no parameters may be one of examples. You can also check that +stringWithString: (and -initWithString:) also return the (retained) parameter string, and copy method in NSString is equivalent to retain.
Remember that optimization is only possible because we know NSString instance is not going to change and the same tests with NSMutableString most likely will to create new string instances.
P.S. About NSAssert usage:
NSAssert Generates an assertion if a given condition is false.
So your assert condition should be reversed:
NSAssert(currentPassword && newPassword && confirmPassword,#"nil field");
When you have NSString as a property you should specify the attribute 'copy' instead.
NSString is defined as an immutable type, so whenever the compiler can optimize things by combining identical strings, it should. if you use #"myString" in two separate places in your code, they will be referencing the very same object. #"" strings are of class NSConstantString
Related
I have been trying to understand the difference between Strong and Weak references in iOS. What I did to understand is:
//.h File
#property(nonatomic,strong) NSString* myStrongString;
#property(nonatomic,weak) NSString* myWeakString;
//.m File
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
[super viewDidLoad];
[self assignTempString];
// Do any additional setup after loading the view, typically from a nib.
}
-(void)assignTempString{
self.myStrongString = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"Varun Mehta"];
}
- (IBAction)printAssignedString:(id)sender {
NSLog(#"Object will have strong reference so it will print my name==%#",self.myStrongString);
}
According to my understanding when I repeat the above step by using myWeakString it should print null. But its still printing my name. Anybody having any idea why its happening.
But when I replace [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"Varun Mehta"] with [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Varun Mehta"] or [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:#"Varun Mehta"] result is coming as I have expected.
There are several things to consider here.
A statically declared string is built into your app so it isn't really retained or released, thus a weak reference to #"my string" will always be valid. The compiler is just recognizing [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"Varun Mehta"] as a static string and removing your alloc/init. However anything that deals with formatting is, by definition, creating a new string and thus the new string obeys the weak referencing rules and is immediately deallocated, nil-ing out the reference.
If you access a weakly retained object that ends up in the autorelease pool it won't actually get deallocated until all your methods return and the run loop goes back into another cycle (and thus drains the autorelease pool), so you can continue to work with the object even though it is "walking dead". This is typically only when interacting with non-ARC code.
If you need practise try this code:
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
[super viewDidLoad];
[self assignTempString];
}
-(void)assignTempString{
#autoreleasepool
{
self.myStrongString = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#", #"Strong string"];
self.myWeakString = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#", #"Weak string"];
}
}
- (IBAction)printAssignedString:(id)sender {
NSLog(#"Strong ptr content: %#",self.myStrongString);
NSLog(#"Weak ptr content: %#",self.myWeakString);
}
[NSString alloc] will allocate an ARC-managed object and will set its retain count to 1. As long as your view controller is alive, this retain count will be 1, so it will not be deallocated. [NSString stringWithFormat:] returns an autoreleased string which is deallocated after the execution of [self assignTempString].
Two methods initWithString and stringWithFormat suggest exactly what is to expect.
So initWithString expects you to create allocate memory and then initialise it.
While stringWithFormat expects you to just point to the string.
When you do a init with your strong/weak variable it will exist till end of your program.
While when you point;
strong literal will keep a reference and hence will not allow ARC to cleanup the string literal,
weak literal will not keep a reference and hence ARC is free to clean it up immediately after the function call.
Hope it clarifies working for you.
What you are experiencing happens because of how NSString is implemented.
Since NSString objects are immutable the compiler takes a shortcut when you use stringWithString: with a string literal as argument. If the argument of this and other related methods is a string literal the returned value will just point to the string literal. The whole object instantiation is optimized away.
And string literals won't be deallocated. But the weak variable is only nil'd out during dealloc, so if dealloc is never called the weak variables are never set to nil.
This won't happen if you use stringWithFormat:. Even using only string literals as argument will create new string instances.
Why? Most likely because Apple decided that it's not worth the effort to check if stringWithFormat: was used with a string literal that does not have any format specifiers.
That's an implementation detail, don't think too long about this decision. It should not influence the code you write. I would suggest you treat every string that is not a bare literal (i.e. #"Foo" without any NSString methods) as dynamically created NSString (i.e. use isEqualToString: for all your string comparisons)
This logging code will show this reuse behaviour. It'll show the same addresses for all NSString instances, because the compiler has optimized all those calls to a simple #"Foo".
NSLog(#"%p", #"Foo");
NSLog(#"%p", [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"Foo"]);
NSLog(#"%p", [NSString stringWithString:#"Foo"]);
NSLog(#"%p", [[NSString stringWithString:#"Foo"] copy]);
NSLog(#"%p", [#"Foo" copy]);
In newer versions of Xcode you will even get nice warnings for this code:
using initWithString: with a literal is redundant
using stringWithString: with a literal is redundant
Currently I'm troubled with a small understanding issue on Objective-C. As example following Aaron Hillegass's book, I'm wondering about assigning an NSString in the init method of a class a value like in this example (For people who know the book, this is used in the Person class of RaiseMan):
- (id)init
{
if(![super init])
return nil;
myString = #"New entry";
return self;
}
This string isn't allocated by me, so normally I shouldn't bother about releasing it.
BUT! What happens in a setter-method of this string? Following the memory management rules the method should look like:
- (void)setMyString:(NSString *)newString
{
if(myString != newString) {
[myString release];
[newString retain];
myString = newString;
}
}
Why does [myString release] work? I've read somewhere, that with = #"bla" assigned strings can't be released.
And is initializing with = #"bla" the right way? Or should I use alloc and init instead?
Thanks for any help :)
NSString *constantString = #"constantString";
String like constantString are said to be from a private(?) class NSConstantString and they are alive through all your program life. Off-course release and retain work, (in the mean that they won't give you a exception or crash) They just do nothing.
Read more here
Also you said in one of your comments that it would be a{#property(..., copy) NSString myString;But what you are showing us is a typical #property(..., retain)
AFAIK, string constants of the form #"..." are actually a child class of NSString that redefine retain and release as no-ops. This allows the compiler to store those string constants in the data segment of your executable instead of on the heap.
Is myString declared in the header-file? Like: #property(nonatomic, retain) NSString myString. If that is the case, then myString is retained. Otherwise, it's not necessary to release it.
I want to use NSMutableDictionary to cache some data i will use later. My custom object is following:
#interface MyData : NSObject {
NSRange range;
NSMutableArray *values;
}
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSMutableArray *values;
and implement:
- (id)init {
if (self = [super init]) {
values = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
}
return self;
}
and when i wanna cache it, i use it like this:
NSMutableDictionary *cache = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] init];
NSString *key = #"KEY";
MyData *data = [[MyData alloc] init];
// save some data into data
[data.values addObject:"DATA1"];
[data.values addObject:"DATA2"];
//... ...
[cache setObject:data forKey:key];
My questions is the count of cache.values is zero when i retrieve this object later as follow:
[cache objectForKey:#"KEY"];
i can retrieve "data" and the object's memory address is the same as the address when i put it into cache.
what's wrong? i need some kind guys help, any info is helpful. thanks
As Carl Norum pointed out, you're passing C strings to addObject:. addObject:, as its name suggests, requires a pointer to a Cocoa object; a C string is a pointer to characters. You need to pass NSString objects there; for literal strings, this simply requires prefixing them with #: "Fred" is a constant C string, whereas #"Fred" is a constant NSString object.
Is cache an instance variable? It looks like it's not; it appears to be a local variable, which means you're creating a new dictionary object every time. That's why there's nothing you've added previously (to previous dictionaries) in the new one. It also means you're leaking those previous dictionaries, since you're not releasing them (not in the code you showed, anyway).
Make cache an instance variable and only create the dictionary when you don't already have one (i.e., when cache == nil). Creating the dictionary in your init method is one good way. And make sure you manage its lifetime appropriately, so you don't leak and/or crash.
First of all your objects your adding don't look right it should have an # before the string. Like #"DATA1"
Second when you add an object to a dictionary or an array it does not make an actual copy of it. It just creates a pointer to it so if those objects are destroyed or moved somewhere also they are also gone out of your dictionary. A better way to make a cache of your values would be to copy the objects like so:
MyData* cache = [[MyData alloc] init];
for (int i = 0; i < [data.values count]; i ++){{
[cache.values addObject:[NSString stringWithString:[data.values objectAtIndex:i]]];
}
Don't use a dictionary in this situation.
I am curious how I might override the description method that is used when you do the following (see below) for an object. I basically want to better format the output, but am unsure about how I might go about setting this up.
NSLog(#"ARRAY: %#", myArray);
many thanks
EDIT_001
Although subclassing NSArray would have worked I instead decided that I would add a category to NSArray (having not used one before) Here is what I added ...
// ------------------------------------------------------------------- **
// CATAGORY: NSArray
// ------------------------------------------------------------------- **
#interface NSArray (displayNSArray)
-(NSString*)display;
#end
#implementation NSArray (displayNSArray)
-(NSString*)display {
id eachIndex;
NSMutableString *outString = [[[NSMutableString alloc] init] autorelease];
[outString appendString:#"("];
for(eachIndex in self) {
[outString appendString:[eachIndex description]];
[outString appendString:#" "];
}
[outString insertString:#")" atIndex:[outString length]-1];
return(outString);
}
#end
gary
If you're doing this a lot, the easiest way to reformat the display of your array would be to add a new prettyPrint category to the NSArray class.
#interface NSArray ( PrettyPrintNSArray )
- (NSSTring *)prettyPrint;
#end
#implementation NSArray ( PrettyPrintNSArray )
- (NSString *)prettyPrint {
NSMutableString *outputString = [[NSMutableString alloc] init];
for( id item in self ) {
[outputString appendString:[item description]];
}
return outputString;
}
#end
Obviously you'd need to alter the for loop to get the formatting the way you want it.
I'm assuming that you myArray variable is an instance of the NSArray/NSMutableArray class.
When NSLog() encounters the # character in its format string, it calls the -description: method on the object. This is a method on the root class, NSObject from which all other Cocoa classes inherit. -description: returns an NSString allowing any object that implements this method to be passed into NSLog(#"#",anyObject) and have a nicely formatted output. The string returned can be anything you care to construct.
For your specific problem, you could subclass NSMutableArray and override the -description: method with your own implementation. Then utilise your subclass instead of NSMutableArray.
For more information on NSObject and -description: see Apple's docs.
From Formatting string objects:
NSString supports the format characters defined for the ANSI C functionprintf(), plus ‘#’ for any object. If the object responds to the descriptionWithLocale: message, NSString sends that message to retrieve the text representation, otherwise, it sends a description message.
So to customize array conversion to string you should change NSArray descriptionWithLocale: implementation. Here's an example of how you can replace object method in run-time.
I read that non mutable data types can't be modified once created.(eg NSString or NSArray).
But can they be re-initialized to point to a different set of objects?
If so, do I use release to free any alloc from first time round in between uses? eg:
myArray declared as NSArray *myArray in interface, and as nonatomic/retain property.myArray set in initialization code to a point to an array of strings as follows.
self.myArray = [myString componentsSeparatedByString:#","];
But later I want to re-initialize myArray to point to a different set of strings
self.myArray = [myOtherString componentsSeparatedByString:#","];
Is it possible? Thanks...
It really depends what you mean with re-initialize. You can assign another immutable object to a pointer, because the pointers aren't constant.
Example:
#interface MyObj : NSObject {
NSString *name; // not needed in 64bit runtime AFAIK
}
#property(retain) NSString *name; // sane people use copy instead of retain
// whenever possible. Using retain can
// lead to some hard to find errors.
#end
/* ... another file ... */
MyObj *theObject = [[[MyObj alloc] init] autorelease];
theObject.name = #"Peter";
NSString *oldName = theObject.name;
NSLog(#"%#", theObject.name); // -> Peter
NSLog(#"%#", oldName); // -> Peter
theObject.name = #"Martin";
NSLog(#"%#", theObject.name) // -> Martin
NSLog(#"%#", oldName) // -> Peter
If the behavior above is what you want, that's fine.
If you want that last line to return Martin you're in trouble. Those are constant strings and are not meant to be modified. You could, if you really want, modify the memory of the object directly, but this is dangerous and not recommended. Use mutable objects if you need such behaviour.
Yes you can reinitialized the NSArray. Here is the sample code that i used to re-initialized the NSArray.
NSString *keywords = #"FirstName|LastName|Address|PhoneNumber";
NSArray *arr = [keywords componentsSeparatedByString:#"|"];
NSLog(#"First Init - %#,%#,%#,%#",[arr objectAtIndex:0],[arr objectAtIndex:1],
[arr objectAtIndex:2],[arr objectAtIndex:3]);
arr = nil;
keywords = #"First_Name|Last_Name|_Address|_PhoneNumber";
arr = [keywords componentsSeparatedByString:#"|"];
NSLog(#"Second Init - %#,%#,%#,%#",[arr objectAtIndex:0],[arr objectAtIndex:1],
[arr objectAtIndex:2],[arr objectAtIndex:3]);
Of course they can. Saying that an NSArray is immutable doesn't mean that an attribute of a class of that type cannot be changed. You can't change the content, but you can assign new content to it.
If you want to make also changing the reference impossible you should use const keyword.