Garbage Collector destroys objects from Interface Builder - objective-c

if i create an instance of my object in the interface builder, it gets destroyed by the garbage collector immediately after loading. What is a clean way to counter this?
I figured out that i can do a [self retain] in the constructor or create an outlet in the window controller. I just think there must be a better official way to do this?
Thanks, Chaosbit

Orphaned objects are generally not a good idea except in special cases, so it's normal that every object have has some other parent object that keeps a reference to it (and retains it).
The best way to achieve this reate an outlet on your window controller (or somewhere else appropriate) and ensure it has the retain attribute set on the property.
(on a sidenote, your object isn't being Garbage Collected, as there is no such thing on Cocoa Touch. It's being autoreleased, which is a different concept)

Related

Do agent/controller objects (nothing is referring to them) get released (Objective-C, ARC)?

I am writing a singleton that will be instantiated in the AppDelegate, but I don't need a reference from AD to it. It is a controller reacting to app state changes.
Since it's not sitting on the main reference tree, will it be auto-released on the next pass (or however it's called when auto-releasing of objects occurs)?
As Neil Daniels pointed out, I am assigning the singleton instance to a static var, which should preserve the object from being released.

dealloc is being called and I am not sure why

I have a view with some buttons, text fields, and methods. When I load the view, switch to another view, and then switch back, my app crashes. I added in an NSLog in each method to see what the last method call before the crash was, and it was -(void)dealloc{
I am wondering why this method was called? Is it called every time you reload a view? I've double checked my code and I definitely do not call it anywhere.
EDIT : Found my problem, I was releasing an array that I was using to store views. Thanks to #Darren I traced my problem.
Dealloc is called when a class is no longer needed and removed from memory.
When you have no more pointers holding onto anything in the view, then it's dealocated.
How are you switching to/from the view?
if you set a (strong) pointer to the view then it won't be dealocated automatically.
-dealloc is called whenever an object's reference count drops to 0. To find your problem, figure out what object's -dealloc was called. What's the second method on the call stack? The third? Was -dealloc sent to a valid object pointer in the first place?
There are several ways to approach this sort of thing. A good first step is to turn on NSZombies (Google for it). That'll let you know if you're sending a message (like, say, dealloc) to an invalid object. Usually, that causes a crash, but with NSZombies you'll get a nice error message instead.

Connecting actions works. Connecting outlets doesn't

I have a XIB file with my controls in it, loaded in the Interface Builder (Xcode 4.0.2 on Snow Leopard).
The file's owner is set to, let's say, the someClassController class, and I've also added (in the Interface Builder) an NSObject instance of someClass, as well.
I've managed to link e.g. a button with an action in someClassController or someClass - and it works for both of them.
However, whenever I link an outlet to ANY of them, it fails to show up; and NSLog reports NULL pointers.
Hint : My issue here could be much more complicated than it seems, since both my someClass and someClassController classes inherit other classes, which inherit other classes and so on (I'm dealing with a huge-to-chaotic codebase, and I don't really know what else could be helpful to post)... However, I would still like to hear your opinion on what might be going wrong in such a case...
When you see problems like this, it's almost always because you have more than one object of the kind that has the outlet. The one in the nib whose outlet you connected is not the one that is examining its outlet.
To investigate this, add statements in the object's initializer method(s) and possibly awakeFromNib to log the value of self.
Some (or all, or none) of the objects may be created in nibs, and some (or all, or none) of them may be created in code; objects in the latter group won't trip awakeFromNib, since they didn't.
Either way, once you've inventoried what instances of the class you have, you can kill them off until you're left with the ones you want.
To add to Peter Hosey's answer, and after reading some more details in the other question you posted about this issue, here are some other factors to consider:
The File Owner class selected in the nib is completely ignored at runtime. It's there only for design-time convenience – for checking available actions and outlets.
Is there any chance you're finding nil pointers in -init? Outlets are connected after -init and before -awakeFromNib. They'll never be connected in -init.
I'm trying to understand the sequence of initialization (from your other post). It sounds like you are creating a new instance of your CTTabContents subclass, and passing it to your CTBrowserWindowController subclass's -addTabContents: method. Then the CTBrowserWindowController loads your objects from the nib.
Or, maybe that's wrong. You might be creating a instance of your CTTabContentsController subclass. Then that object is loading TabContents.xib.
It's important to track down where the nib is being loaded and which object is being provided as the file owner at that time.
Another question: are you using manual release/retain, automatic reference counting, or garbage collection?
Finally, I reiterate the importance of printing out the self pointer in your initialization methods. In addition to -init and -awakeFromNib, try other initialization methods like your CTTabContents subclass' -initWithFrame:. When you're discovering intermittent null pointers in the rest of your debugging, print out the self pointers then, too. You'll probably be seeing different values of self then, too.

Keeping pointers to subviews

Subviews added to a view are automatically retained by the view. Suppose you want to have a separate pointer to the same subview so you don't need to constantly retrieve it via its tag.
What type of #property is necessary for such a case? I assume that setting the property to retain is not a good idea since the main view is already retaining it? Should it be assign?
Or, is using #property entirely unnecessary here unless you plan to re-assign it later or refer to it with dot notation?
You can use either retain or assign.
Of course, if you use retain, you have to set the property to nil or release its object in viewDidUnload and dealloc.
The reason some people prefer retain is because it means the property is still valid in viewDidUnload. So if you have other cleanup to do, and that cleanup requires the view to still exist, you can do it in viewDidUnload.
If you use assign, you don't have to set the property to nil in viewDidUnload and dealloc (though it would be good practice). However, by the time you receive viewDidUnload, the view has already been released, so you can't use it at that point for other cleanup. Instead you have to override didReceiveMemoryWarning to do the cleanup before calling [super didReceiveMemoryWarning].
In iOS 5.0, you can do the cleanup in viewWillUnload instead of overriding didReceiveMemoryWarning.
Consider these two things:
There's no problem with retaining an object several times provided that each retain is balanced with release. With respect to properties, this just means that you should set your property to nil when you're done with it.
The basic idea behind memory management in Objective-C is that you worry about retaining the objects that you're using and let other objects worry about the objects that they're using.
Considering these, I'd advocate using retain. If you rely on he fact that a view retains its subviews, you've suddenly made your code dependant on external behavior. I'm not saying that UIView is likely to stop retaining its subviews, but if you keep a non-retained reference to a subview and later remove that subview from its superview you're code is likely to crash.
Some folks do use assign for outlets pointing to subviews when they know those subviews will never be removed. Personally, I don't see the point of relying on another object to retain something for you when retaining that thing yourself is so simple and cheap.

Cocoa Touch Question. Using KVO in a touch sequence context

I would like to use KVO in the following context:
1) In touchesBegan:withEvent: I alloc/init an instance of an object that I then observe via KVO
My intent is to observe varous behaviors of the object throughout its life time.
2) In touchesEnded:withEvent: I assign this instance to an NSMutableArray and release the instance reference since NSMutableArray now retains it. I also must remove the oberver of the instance via removeObserver:forKeyPath:
This is problematic because I now have lost all observation unless I add the observe back again to the array element which smells bad.
Is there a way to have the observer remain attached to the object regardless of who owns it?
Thanks,
Doug
In Objective-C, you don't "own" an object, you merely have a claim on it. You don't need to release the instance just because the NSMutableArray retains it -- you can both have a claim on it. When you've finished with the object, remove yourself as an observer and release the object. When you've finished with the NSMutableArray, release that. This way, everything takes care of itself.