What does the "__block" keyword mean? - objective-c

What exactly does the __block keyword in Objective-C mean? I know it allows you to modify variables within blocks, but I'd like to know...
What exactly does it tell the compiler?
Does it do anything else?
If that's all it does then why is it needed in the first place?
Is it in the docs anywhere? (I can't find it).

It tells the compiler that any variable marked by it must be treated in a special way when it is used inside a block. Normally, variables and their contents that are also used in blocks are copied, thus any modification done to these variables don't show outside the block. When they are marked with __block, the modifications done inside the block are also visible outside of it.
For an example and more info, see The __block Storage Type in Apple's Blocks Programming Topics.
The important example is this one:
extern NSInteger CounterGlobal;
static NSInteger CounterStatic;
{
NSInteger localCounter = 42;
__block char localCharacter;
void (^aBlock)(void) = ^(void) {
++CounterGlobal;
++CounterStatic;
CounterGlobal = localCounter; // localCounter fixed at block creation
localCharacter = 'a'; // sets localCharacter in enclosing scope
};
++localCounter; // unseen by the block
localCharacter = 'b';
aBlock(); // execute the block
// localCharacter now 'a'
}
In this example, both localCounter and localCharacter are modified before the block is called. However, inside the block, only the modification to localCharacter would be visible, thanks to the __block keyword. Conversely, the block can modify localCharacter and this modification is visible outside of the block.

#bbum covers blocks in depth in a blog post and touches on the __block storage type.
__block is a distinct storage type
Just like static, auto, and volatile, __block is a storage type. It
tells the compiler that the variable’s storage is to be managed
differently....
However, for __block variables, the block does not retain. It is up to you to retain and release, as needed.
...
As for use cases you will find __block is sometimes used to avoid retain cycles since it does not retain the argument. A common example is using self.
//Now using myself inside a block will not
//retain the value therefore breaking a
//possible retain cycle.
__block id myself = self;

When you don't use __block, the block copies the variable (call-by-value), so even if you modify the variable elsewhere, the block doesn't see the changes.
__block makes the blocks keep a reference to the variable (call-by-reference).
NSString* str = #"hello";
void (^theBlock)() = ^void() {
NSLog(#"%#", str);
};
str = #"how are you";
theBlock(); //prints #"hello"
In these 2 cases you need __block:
If you want to modify the variable inside the block and expect it to be visible outside:
__block NSString* str = #"hello";
void (^theBlock)() = ^void() {
str = #"how are you";
};
theBlock();
NSLog(#"%#", str); //prints "how are you"
If you want to modify the variable after you have declared the block and you expect the block to see the change:
__block NSString* str = #"hello";
void (^theBlock)() = ^void() {
NSLog(#"%#", str);
};
str = #"how are you";
theBlock(); //prints "how are you"

__block is a storage qualifier that can be used in two ways:
Marks that a variable lives in a storage that is shared between the lexical scope of the original variable and any blocks declared within that scope. And clang will generate a struct to represent this variable, and use this struct by reference(not by value).
In MRC, __block can be used to avoid retain object variables a block captures. Careful that this doesn't work for ARC. In ARC, you should use __weak instead.
You can refer to apple doc for detailed information.

__block is a storage type that is use to make in scope variables mutable, more frankly if you declare a variable with this specifier, its reference will be passed to blocks not a read-only copy for more details see Blocks Programming in iOS

hope this will help you
let suppose we have a code like:
{
int stackVariable = 1;
blockName = ^()
{
stackVariable++;
}
}
it will give an error like "variable is not assignable" because the stack variable inside the block are by default immutable.
adding __block(storage modifier) ahead of it declaration make it mutable inside the block i.e __block int stackVariable=1;

From the Block Language Spec:
In addition to the new Block type we also introduce a new storage qualifier, __block, for local variables. [testme: a __block declaration within a block literal] The __block storage qualifier is mutually exclusive to the existing local storage qualifiers auto, register, and static.[testme] Variables qualified by __block act as if they were in allocated storage and this storage is automatically recovered after last use of said variable. An implementation may choose an optimization where the storage is initially automatic and only "moved" to allocated (heap) storage upon a Block_copy of a referencing Block. Such variables may be mutated as normal variables are.
In the case where a __block variable is a Block one must assume that the __block variable resides in allocated storage and as such is assumed to reference a Block that is also in allocated storage (that it is the result of a Block_copy operation). Despite this there is no provision to do a Block_copy or a Block_release if an implementation provides initial automatic storage for Blocks. This is due to the inherent race condition of potentially several threads trying to update the shared variable and the need for synchronization around disposing of older values and copying new ones. Such synchronization is beyond the scope of this language specification.
For details on what a __block variable should compile to, see the Block Implementation Spec, section 2.3.

It means that the variable it is a prefix to is available to be used within a block.

Related

Why did Apple design __block for write auto var in block?

We can read auto var in block:
int aVar = 1;
dispatch_after(dispatch_time(DISPATCH_TIME_NOW, (int64_t)(2 * NSEC_PER_SEC)), dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
NSLog(#"theVar==%d", aVar);
});
But can not write:
int aVar = 1;
dispatch_after(dispatch_time(DISPATCH_TIME_NOW, (int64_t)(2 * NSEC_PER_SEC)), dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
aVar = 2;
NSLog(#"theVar==%d", aVar);
});
Xcode showed:Variable is not assignable (missing __block type specifier).
I know that when there is no __block,auto var pass to block as a copy so it's readonly.And with __block its address pass to block.
But I can't understand why Apple must design as this?Just copy address to block is not OK?Is there any potential problem If auto var in block without __block is writeable?
It's not as simple as "with __block its address pass to block", because a block that captures the variable can outlive the scope that it's created in, and a local variable of automatic storage duration would become invalid at the end of the scope, so just capturing its address won't work.
A variable declared with __block actually involves a hidden structure behind the scenes, which can be "moved" from the stack to the heap if necessary so it can outlive the scope it was created in, and there are additional hidden fields that the compiler generates behind the scenes to allow someone accessing the variable to figure out the real location of the variable (stack or heap) at that time. Also, the blocks need to manage the memory of the copy of the variable on the heap. So defining a __block variable requires additional storage compared to the variable itself, and accessing a __block variable requires more levels of indirection and more memory management logic for the blocks involved. This additional complication should only be used if needed; therefore, variables captured by blocks are not __block by default.

Objective-C autoreleasepool directive effect variables outside scope.

Let's say I've got c++ function combined with objective-c members.
The function gets std::string and convert it to NSstring*, and work with this variable before leaving...
Should i expect the NSstring* to be released at the end of autoreleasepool scope ?
void myclass::myfunc(context& ctx)
{
#autoreleasepool
{
std::string path = ctx.getData().path;
NSString *nsPath = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:path.c_str()];
... (do something with nsString, Should it be released after leaving the scope ?)
}
}
No you don't need to. According to the rule you only need release the variable if you are increasing its retain count in one of the following ways:
Initializing via new or alloc/init.
Copying via copy.
Increasing the retain count via retain.
If you are getting a variable by any means but the above-mentioned ways, you don't own it, and hence you don't need to release it.
The string returned via [NSString stringWithUTF8String:path.c_str()] is autoreleased string. It will be released once the current runloop finishes. So you don't need to release it.

Modify parameters in Objective-C blocks

I would like to modify various variables which exist outside an Objective-C block within it's body.
I know I can directly access and modify a variable using the __block attribute while declaring the variable. So this works:
__block NSMutableString *alertMessage;
void(^appendMessage)(NSMutableString*, NSString*)= ^(NSString *append){
if (!alertMessage)
{
alertMessage = [NSMutableString new];
}
if ([append length] > 0)
{
[alertMessage appendString:#"\n"];
}
[alertMessage appendString:append];
};
appendMessage(#"Alert part 1"); //This works fine
However I want to create a block which can perform an operation on a passed variable, enabling me to use the operation on multiple variables outside the block without directly accessing the same. Something like the following:
__block NSMutableString *alertMessage;
__block NSMutableString *otherString;
void(^appendMessage)(NSMutableString*, NSString*)= ^(NSMutableString *string, NSString *append){
if (!string)
{
string = [NSMutableString new];
}
if ([append length] > 0)
{
[string appendString:#"\n"];
}
[string appendString:append];
};
//The following do not work as intended
appendMessage(alertMessage, #"Alert Part 1");
appendMessage(otherString, #"Bleh bleh");
I want to be able to use the above block to modify the variables declared before it.
How can I achieve such an operation? Is this even possible?
Your question shows some confusion over values and variables, maybe the following will help.
Modify parameters in Objective-C blocks
In (Objective-)C all parameters to methods/functions/blocks are passed by value, e.g. when in the call f(x) the value of the variable x is passed to f, not the variable itself. This is known as call-by-value.
There are languages which do allow variables to be passed, known as call-by-reference. When used the argument must be a variable and the parameter name within the function is effectively an alias to the supplied variable. This is not supported directly in (Objective-)C.
However you can emulate it in (Objective-)C. It is not commonly used, with one notable exception: many methods use it to return an NSError * value.
You later comment:
What I want to achieve includes object creation, which is essentially what the question now boils down to. "Can I create an object declared outside within a block?". The answer which I have gathered with the help of all the activity here is NO.
You can, it is just a question of whether you should (i.e. is the design right?) and the best way to do it.
The straightforward way to solve your particular issue is to write a function:
NSMutableString *alertMessage;
NSMutableString *otherString;
NSMutableString *(^appendMessage)(NSMutableString *, NSString *) =
^(NSMutableString *string, NSString *append)
{
if (!string)
string = [NSMutableString new];
if (append.length > 0)
{
[string appendString:#"\n"];
[string appendString:append];
}
return string;
};
alertMessage = appendMessage(alertMessage, #"Alert Part 1");
otherString = appendMessage(otherString, #"Bleh bleh");
If you really (really, really) want to you can instead "pass the variable" by passing its address (using the & operator) and indirection (using the * operator) inside the block to get/set the value:
void (^appendMessage)(NSMutableString **, NSString *) =
^(NSMutableString **stringPtr, NSString *append)
{
if (!stringPtr) return; // no "variable" passed
NSMutableString *string = *stringPtr; // use indirection to get the value in the passed variable
if (!string)
string = [NSMutableString new];
if (append.length > 0)
{
[string appendString:#"\n"];
[string appendString:append];
}
*stringPtr = string; // use indirection to set the passed variable
};
appendMessage(&alertMessage, #"Alert Part 1"); // pass "variable" by passing its address
appendMessage(&otherString, #"Bleh bleh");
While the above is valid code it is generally not recommended coding practice in Objective-C for simple cases such as yours.
Once you take the address of a variable you need to be concerned over the lifetime of that variable - if you attempt to use the address to access the variable after the variable has been destroyed your program will fail (the dangling pointer problem)
What about __block?
Neither of the above examples use __block anywhere.
When a block references a variable by default it captures the variables value at the time the block is created. The __block attribute changes this to capturing the variable (so its value can be changed by the block) and alters the lifetime of the capture variable if required (so the variable lives at least as long as the capturing block, avoiding the dangling pointer problem).
The __block attribute is not applicable in your situation as you wish to capture different variables based on the call.
HTH
The code, as written, seems to confuse operation on object with object creation.
For clarity's sake, you should either pass in a mutable object to be manipulated or you should define a single __block variable whose value will be set by the block (and you do the logic after to figure out where that value should be stuffed).
Passing in something by reference is inherently dangerous to the point of being an anti-pattern (what happens as soon as you try to refactor the code to be asynchronous? At least in the __block case, the code after the block will see nil).
i.e.:
__block NSMutableString *foo = [sourceString mutableCopy];
doIt(#"new stuff"); // appends to `foo`
whereItShouldReallyGo = foo;

weak definition of a bool in block

To define a weak references for objects in block i use something like this
MyViewController *__weak weakSelf= self;
UILabel *__weak weakLabel=ALabel;
///the block code with some examples
up2.completionBlock = ^(NSDictionary *headers, NSString *responseString) {
[weakSelf aMethodInTheController];
[weakLabel setHidden:NO];
};
I have problem with a bool, how i can declare a weak reference to a bool to avoid the warnings "capturing self strongly in this block is likely to lead to a retain cycle" ?
Not works with:
Bool *__weak weakFlag=Aflag;
Well, it's not obvious what you are trying to do here.
There are two possibilities. Perhaps you need to pass a parameter to the block. So there is a variable of type bool or BOOL (they are similar for the purposes of this question) and you want to use it in the block.
Then, good news! You don't need anything at all. Just declare
BOOL some_bool = (YES or NO or some calculation);
and use it later in the block. This works because Boolean types are primitive (they are some kind of integer) and not smart enough to participate in memory management. So the compiler doesn't worry much; it just grabs the value of this variable when the block is created and copies it into the block.
Here's the relevant documentation:
Only the value is captured, unless you specify otherwise. This means that if you change the external value of the variable between the time you define the block and the time it’s invoked, ...
Alternatively, perhaps you want to have a variable which can take logical values and which can be changed by some other object in the time between you create the block and the time when it is run. In that case you need to
wrap boolean into NSNumber
store the strong reference to this NSNumber somewhere in your object
pass it as a weak pointer to the block
E.g.
// somewhere in the interface
#property NSNumber *someImportantFlag
__weak NSNumber *weakFlag = someImportantFlag;
... ^{ ... if(weakFlag.boolValue) ... weakFlag = #(NO); ...}
Thanks to the commenters who made me reread the question and my answer.

How can code inside an Objective-C block reference the block object itself?

self is merely a captured variable inside a block and doesn't reference the block itself, so how does a block reference itself without having an explicit captured variable for that purpose?
__block void(^strawberryFields)();
strawberryFields = [^{ strawberryFields(); } copy];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT,0),
strawberryFields);
you use the __block because the block will make a copy of the value of strawberryFields when the block is created which will be before the assignment.
you also must copy the block prior to any other copy operation or else you'll end up with a block that references the on-stack original version.
note that the above code leaks the block. Somewhere, there needs to be a release of that block to balance the copy.
I found this pattern to work and stable for ARC (automatic reference counting), both in Debug and Release builds.
-(void) someMethod
{
// declare a __block variable to use inside the block itself for its recursive phase.
void __block (^myBlock_recurse)();
// define the block
void (^myBlock)() = ^{
// ... do stuff ...
myBlock_recurse(); // looks like calling another block, but not really.
};
// kickstart the block
myBlock_recurse = myBlock; // initialize the alias
myBlock(); // starts the block
}
Initially I tried just putting a __block modifier to myBlock and use that variable directly to recurse within the block's implementation. That works on the ARC Debug build but breaks with an EXC_BAD_ACCESS on the Release build. On the other hand removing the __block modifier raises a "variable not defined when captured by block" warning (and I was reluctant to run it and test).
I have never tried this before and not 100% sure it's useful, if valid, but for example:
typedef void (^BasicBlock)(void);
__block BasicBlock testBlock;
testBlock = ^{NSLog(#"Testing %p", &testBlock);};
testBlock();
You probably have declare the variable with __block to prevent self-retain cycle.
The block needs some way to nil out its own reference. Typically it is done by storing the block in a property of the class.
Sometimes you can prefer to not use a property. Here is how you do it without a property:
__weak id weakSelf = self;
__block id block = ^{
if(weakSelf) {
// .. do whatever
dispatch_after(dispatch_time(DISPATCH_TIME_NOW, 5 * NSEC_PER_SEC), dispatch_get_main_queue(), block);
}
else {
block = nil;
}
};
dispatch_after(dispatch_time(DISPATCH_TIME_NOW, 5 * NSEC_PER_SEC), dispatch_get_main_queue(), block);
The key thing to keep in mind is that all code paths must lead to a block = nil. We do that here by calling the block every 5 seconds until weakSelf turns nil.
Note that in ARC, it's a little different -- __block object pointer variables are by default retained in ARC, unlike in MRC. Thus, it will cause a retain cycle. It is necessary for the block to capture a weak reference to itself (using __weak) in order to not have a retain cycle.
However, we still need a strong reference to the block somewhere. If there are no strong references, the block (which is on the heap since it's copied) will be deallocated. Thus, we need two variables, one strong and one weak, and inside the block use the weak one to reference itself:
__block __weak void(^weakBlock)();
void(^myBlock)();
weakBlock = myBlock = [^{ weakBlock(); } copy];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT,0),
myBlock);