UIView *view; //1
UISegmentedControl *scopeBar; //2
NSMutableArray *array; //3
#property (nonatomic, retain) IBOutlet UIView *view;
#property (nonatomic, retain) UISegmentedControl *scopeBar;
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSMutableArray *array;
.m
#synthesize view, scopeBar, array;
for (id subView in [view subviews]) {
if ([subView isMemberOfClass:[UISegmentedControl class]]) {
scopeBar = (UISegmentedControl *)subView;
}
}
array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
- (void)dealloc {
}
I think that only the third of the variables has to be released in the dealloc method.
Is that right?
Yes, (array needs to be released) because you alloc it. So, it's programmer's responsibility to release it. So -
- (void)dealloc {
[ array release ] ;
// Any other resources alloc, init, new should be released
}
For more info on what to release, Memory management - ObjectiveC
And I think you will find good suggestions in this question about your query
Why should we release?
Contrary to some of the answers, you have to release your outlet (view) as well, and not only in the dealloc but also in the viewDidUnload, the easiest way is to set it to nil :
self.view = nil;
Also note that if you don't access your properties but your instance variables (i.e. without self. prefix) your retain attribute won't help you and you are not retaining the object. That means that as soon as scopeBar would be removed out of the subViews of the view, it will be released and you end up accessing a zombie.
As a rule of thumb, it's best to use the properties accessor everywhere except in the init methods so that you don't have to deal with the memory management explicitly. Setting them to nil in the dealloc and viewDidUnload in case of outlets should be enough then.
Also, don't do what Jenifer suggested and once you've called a release on a variable, don't set the property to nil, that would overrelease it.
I think that only the third of the variables has to be released in the dealloc method. Is that right?
// no. your dealloc should look like this:
- (void)dealloc {
// note: *not* using accessors in dealloc
[view release], view = nil;
[scopeBar release], scopeBar = nil;
[array release], array = nil;
[super dealloc];
}
// your assignment of `scopeBar` should look like this:
...
self.scopeBar = (UISegmentedControl *)subView;
...
// you want to retain the view, as advertised.
// consider avoiding an ivar if you can easily access it.
// your assignment of `view` should look like this:
...
self.view = theView;
...
// you want to retain the view, as advertised.
// consider avoiding an ivar if you can easily access it.
// your assignment of `array` should look like this in your initializer:
// note: *not* using accessors in initializer
...
// identical to `array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];`
array = [NSMutableArray new];
...
// and the assignment of `array` should look like this in other areas:
...
self.array = [NSMutableArray array];
...
// you're likely to be best suited to declare your array as
// follows (assuming you really need a mutable array):
...
NSMutableArray *array; // << the declaration of the ivar
...
...
// the declaration of the public accessors.
// note the array is copied, and passed/returned as NSArray
#property (nonatomic, copy) NSArray *array;
...
// finally, the implementation manual of the properties:
- (NSArray *)array {
// copy+autorelease is optional, but a good safety measure
return [[array copy] autorelease];
}
- (void)setArray:(NSArray *)arg {
NSMutableArray * cp = [arg mutableCopy];
// lock? notify?
NSMutableArray * prev = array;
array = cp;
[prev release], prev = nil;
// unlock? notify? update?
}
other answers assume that dangling pointers (e.g., you still hold a pointer to view, although the view may have changed behind your back) are allowable.
they should not be allowed in real programs. they are extremely dangerous, and it can very difficult to reproduce errors they cause. therefore, you must ensure you own a reference to the pointers you maintain/hold.
you should also use the accessors in the public interface for the subclasser's sake - in case they override them. if you don't want to allow/support that, consider simply using a private variable.
As i think you should release and set them nil because you have made them properties so do this:-
in your dealloc
[array release];
self.array=nil;
self.scopeBar=nil;
self.view=nil;
Related
This is one segment of codes used in one of my project for managing one of my class instance:
#interface C: NSObject
{
NSMutableArray *myArr;
}
#property (nonatomic,retain) NSMutableArray *myArr;
//...
#end
#implementation C
#synthesize myArr;
//...
-(id)init
{
//...
myArr = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
//...
}
//version 1 of dealloc method
-(void)dealloc
{
//...
self.myArr = nil;
//...
}
//version 2 of dealloc method
-(void)dealloc
{
//...
[myArr release];
//...
}
here the version 1 dealloc method doesn't work and Xcode says something like "EXC_BAD_ACCESS..." and the app crashed.
if I modified the dealloc method as version 2, it works.
Does anybody have any idea why?
Thx in advance.
As Duncan said, the EXEC_BAD_ACCESS error means that the object doesn't exist anymore.
This is probably due to the fact that myArr is being released before the dealloc gets called.
To facilitate memory management and to keep track of reference counts, I like to make it clearer in the init methods, for example:
-(id)init
{
//...
NSMutableArray *array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] initWithCapacity:0];
self.myArr = array;
[array release];
//...
}
By using the generated setter self.myArr = array; you are ensuring that the reference count is being delt with correctly, it will release the old value and retain the new one for you.
#MadhavanRP : if the property is a retained property:
#property(nonatomic, retain) NSMutableArray *myArr;
calling
self.myArr = nil
is exactely the same as calling
[myArr release];
myArr = nil;
Edit: #Sylvain beat me to it :)
This is OK even if it's bad idea/confusing to have same name for iVar and property. I removed the iVar declaration.
#interface C: NSObject
{}
#property (nonatomic,retain) NSMutableArray *myArr;
//...
#end
Generate your iVar using #synthetize.
#implementation C
#synthesize myArr = _myArr;
//...
Your init is all wrong. You are assigning the iVar without using the setter method.
-(id)init
{
//...
// You were doing
// _myArr = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
// You should do
NSMutableArray array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
self.myArr = array;
[array release];
// You could avoid the temporary variable but this confuse XCode static analyzer
//...
}
This is OK. I guess that #synthetize generated another iVar to back your property.
This other iVar was not properly assign.
You would not notice this if you do not user self.myArr (or the equivalent [self myArr]).
This confusion is main reason why hardcore ObjC programmer do not like the new property thing. :) This confuse new programmers.
//version 1 of dealloc method
-(void)dealloc
{
//...
self.myArr = nil;
//...
}
This is not good as you bypass the setter, as in init method. This was working anyway.
//version 2 of dealloc method
-(void)dealloc
{
//...
[myArr release];
//...
}
It looks like your myArr object is being messaged when it should not be, in the first case you hide the problem by setting it to nil, in the second you don't. Either method should not crash. When do you call [super dealloc]; (you should call it at the end of the dealloc implementation).
If I have a variable in my view controler
viewcontroller.m
#interface MemoryTestViewController : UIViewController
{
NSMutableArray *array;
}
#end
in my implementation
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
[super viewDidLoad];
NSMutableArray *aux = [[NSMutableArray alloc] initWithCapacity:1];
array = aux;
[aux release];
// Do i have to do array release?
}
Do i have to release my variable array somewhere? Theoricaly i havent allocated that variable...
I testes the memory leaks and even if i dont release anything the instruments doesn't detect any leak.
No, you don't need to release. All you do is assign the pointer of aux to your array variable.
array is invalid at the moment where you release aux.
This is probably not as intended. If you want to work with array, you'll have to retain it.
You've already released the array with [aux release]; -- you in fact have the opposite problem to a leak: an over-release.
Assignments in Objective-C are just assignments of pointers; there's no copying or automatic memory management. When you say array = aux;, array now points to the exact same object as aux. If you then get rid of aux by releasing it (and therefore letting it be deallocated), array doesn't point to anything anymore.*
You have a couple of options for fixing this:
(Simplest) Assign the newly-created array directly to array:
array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] initWithCapacity:1];
This gives you ownership of the new array, under the name array. Don't release it until you are done with it (possibly in dealloc; certainly not in this method).
(Best) Create a declared property for array and let that mechanism handle the memory management for you:
#interface MemoryTestViewController : UIViewController
{
NSMutableArray *array;
}
#property (copy, nonatomic, setter=setArrayByMutableCopy) NSMutableArray * array;
#end
#implementation MemoryTestViewController
#synthesize array;
// Properties can't automatically make mutable copies, so you need to create
// your own setter method.
- (void) setArrayByMutableCopy: (NSMutableArray *)newArray {
NSMutableArray * tmp = [newArray mutableCopy];
[array release];
array = tmp;
}
...
*Or, rather, it points to a place where there used to be a valid object, which is a great way to make your program crash.
No. Assigning an object to a variable does not retain it. However if you plan to use that variable for a while, you should retain it and release it when you are done with it.
alloc raised the retain counter to 1 and [aux release] set it to 0
You should add a property:
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSMutableArray *array;
and later in your viewDidLoad:
// wrong, leaks: self.array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] initWithCapacity:1];
array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] initWithCapacity:1];
and yes, somewhat later release it, probably in dealloc..
Is the following code doing anything unnecessary?
#interface MyClass {
NSArray *myArray;
}
-(void)replaceArray:(NSArray *)newArray;
#implementation MyClass
-(void)replaceArray:(NSArray *)newArray {
if( myArray )
{
[myArray release];
myArray = nil;
}
myArray = [[NSArray alloc] initWithArray: newArray];
}
#end
What if I made the following changes:
1) Made myArray a property:
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSArray myArray;
2) Changed the assignment to:
self.myArray = [NSArray arrayWithArray: newArray];
Would that allow me to remove the conditional?
You don't need the conditional at all; you can message nil (including a release), and nothing will happen. You also don't need to allocate a new array; you can retain the one passed to you instead. If you're worried about actually getting an NSMutableArray, you can make a copy. I'd do this:
- (void)replaceArray:(NSArray *)newArray
{
[myArray autorelease];
myArray = [newArray copy];
}
Or, if you don't want to use autorelease, you could do:
- (void)replaceArray:(NSArray *)newArray
{
if (myArray != newArray) {
[myArray release];
myArray = [newArray copy];
}
}
You can already get rid of the conditional. If the array is nil, then you'll be sending a message to nil, which is a no-op. The assignment to nil is pointless either way as well. And if you make it a retain property, explicitly releasing the old value is wrong.
However, there is one case where that code will not work correctly: When the argument is the current value. In that case, you'll release the current value and then try to use the released object (which may already have been dealloced) to create a new array.
Imaging the following:
MyClass * myObj;
// init myObj
NSArray * array = [myObj myArray];
[myObj replaceArray:array];
In this case, myArray and newArray are the same, which means you're using it after it being released. To solve this problem, all you need to do is remove the replaceArray: method, and implement the property as #synthesize myArray. So the above code changes to
MyClass * myObj;
// init myObj
NSArray * array = [myObj myArray];
[myObj setMyArray:array];
and your problem is solved by the synthesized implementation.
Note that you are setting your value by creating a new array:
myArray = [[NSArray alloc] initWithArray: newArray];
if this is the behaviour you want, you should change your property definition to copy instead of retain:
#property (nonatomic, copy) NSArray myArray;
I've voted up mipadi because his answer is right in the context of the question you asked, but why not just use a property and do away with replaceArray: altogether:
#interface MyClass {
NSArray *myArray;
}
#property (copy) NSArray* myArray;
#end
#implementation MyClass
#synthesize myArray;
-(void) dealloc
{
[myArray release];
[super dealloc];
}
#end
When you synthesize a property (see below)
#interface CelestialBody : NSObject {
NSString *name;
}
...
#interface Planet : NSObject {
NSString *name;
int mass;
CelestialBody *moon;
}
#property(nonatomic, retain) NSString *name;
#property(assign) int *mass;
#property(nonatomic, retain) CelestialBody *moon;
...
#implementation Planet
#synthesize name;
#synthesize mass;
#synthesize moon;
...
You get setters and getters for each of the iVars (i.e.)
[newPlanet setName:#"Jupiter"];
[newPlanet setMass:57];
NSString *closestName = [newPlanet name];
int largestMass = [newPlanet mass];
CelestialBody *newMoon = [[CelestialBody alloc] initWithName:#"Callisto"];
[self setMoon:newMoon];
[newMoon release];
but you also get the ability to release the object using ...
// Releases the object (frees memory) and sets the object pointer to nil.
[self setMoon: nil];
There will of course be deallocs for each Class.
// Moon
-(void)dealloc {
[name release];
[super dealloc];
}
// Planet
-(void)dealloc {
[name release];
[moon release];
[super dealloc];
}
Am I getting this right?
gary
Unless your planet object is declared as a property within some other class, using the retain/copy attributes, you can't release it this way.
When you declare a property using retain/copy, the resulting setter will release the old value and assign the new value, retaining or copying it in the process. If you pass nil, you will release the old value and assign nil, retaining or copying it, and retaining/copying nil is nil, so effectively you end up releasing the old value and assigning nil to the ivar.
This is an acceptable way to release instance variables.
In order to be able to release your newPlanet instance this way, you'd have to have declared it in a class as a property with either retain or copy.
As a further example, since your planet object declares its properties in this way, you could release those using this method.
Or in the Planet class's dealloc method, you could do:
self.name = nil;
This would release name and assign nil to it.
"you also get the ability to release the object"
Yes, as long as you didn't declare it with the assign attribute.
As you probably know, one of the reasons (although perhaps not the primary one) for using declared properties is that you can do:
self.moon = aMoon;
rather than;
[self setMoon:aMoon];
They are equivalent. That means that your deallocation can look like this:
self.moon = nil; // Releases and sets to nil
But remember to never just do:
moon = nil; // Sets to nil, doesn't release
It's very good practice to not only release the object, but to set the variable to nil, as you do, because otherwise some other code could mistakenly try to use the pointer that is left in the variable.
Your example shows the synthesis of one class's ivars (those of Planet) but the use of another (whatever "self" is). Is the "newPlanet" property of "self" in your last example also synthesized as (retain)? If so, then: Yes, setting newPlanet to nil will release whatever self's old "newPlanet" was.
I think you are not getting it right.
After your question update, yes, you can do that, and also:
self.moon = [[CelestialBody alloc] initWithName:#"Callisto"];
and release it later, probably in your dealloc method:
self.moon = nil;
Apple Objective-c 2.0 Properties and Memory Management docs are pretty good. Check Mac Dev Center library.
In the iPhone objective-c world, I've seen this pattern everywhere and I use it myself all the time without really understanding what is going on:
In Test.h
#interface Test: UIViewController
{
NSMutableArray *testArray;
}
#property (retain, nonatomic) NSMutableArray *testArray;
And in Test.m
#implementation Test
#synthesize testArray
- (void) viewDidLoad
{
// why do we do this?
NSMutableArray *init = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
self.testArray = init;
[init release];
[self.testArray addObject: #"A"]; // why can't I do this directly?
...
}
- (void) dealloc
{
[testArray release];
[super dealloc];
}
My question is: if testArray has a retain on it when it's declared in the property, why do we need to create a new NSMutableArray init object, assign that to testArray and release? Why can't I just start using testArray in viewDidLoad without doing anything else?
I know there's some debate over the best way of doing this (creating a new object, or using an autorelease object), but in both cases, we end up with testArray with a retain count of 1. Which I believe the 'retain' property already gives it. So why the need to create this init object?
The 'retain' property doesn't automatically create an NSMutableArray for you. Rather, it simply indicates that whenever you do assign something to that property, it will be retained.
If your code were this:
- (void) viewDidLoad
{
[self.testArray addObject: #"A"];
}
Then self.testArray would be nil, and thus it would be essentially a no-op. Until you assign something to self.testArray, it's empty.
Here's what's going on.
- (void) viewDidLoad
{
// we need to assign an NSMutableArray to self.testArray.
NSMutableArray *init = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
// The array has been retained once (by the call to |alloc|)
self.testArray = init;
// The array is assigned to a property with the 'retain' attribute
// Thus, the array has now been retained twice
[init release];
// We release the array, so it now is retained once.
// We now have an array in self.testArray, so we can add something to it.
[self.testArray addObject: #"A"];
}
The "retain" in the #property directive specifies that the setter should retain the input value instead of simply copying the value. It has nothing to do with allocating (setting aside memory) and initializing (constructing the object) the object. retain on the #property directive simply increments the retain count when the setter is called (which alllows you to do something like self.myobject = something without specifically calling retain.