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.
Related
I've subclassed NSMutableDictioary following mainly this great blog post.
Now in that subclass the dictionary itself subscribes to all its values in order to detect any changes. This bit works just fine and value changes are observed internally in that subclass.
However value changes should then be propagated to observers of the dictionary, i.e. observers of the dictionary (subclass) are supposed to get notified that the dictionary has changed.
Except I cannot figure out how to trigger that KVO notification - using
[self didChangeValueForKey:#"self"];
doesn't seem to have any effect so I'm kinda stuck.
How can an instance of the NSMutableDictionary subclass initiate a change notification for itself?
As already hinted by Ken KVO allows you to observe properties - not an object per se!
The Key-Value Observing Programming Guide states, that
Key-value observing provides a mechanism that allows objects to be notified of changes to specific properties of other objects.
In other words: self can never be observed.
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.
I have class Item and class List (which has an NSMutableArray).
Every time class Item is instantiated (and destroyed) it posts a notification, which is listened-to by class List. When class List receives the notification is adds the instance of class Item to its list.
I'm trying to have class Item also post a notification that its about to be dealloc'd. The problem is that class List's NSMutableArray retains the instance of class Item.
What's the most appropriate means of handling this situation? If I decrement the count when adding it to List's array, then an exception will be thrown when class List attempts to call removeObject (since it'll try to dealloc the object.)
Basically, I want a "monitor" class List that contains a list of all "live" instances of Item. But, I also need the ability to release/dealloc the instances and have them report they're being dealloc'd so List can remove them from its NSMutableArray.
Thanks for your help.
If I understand correctly, you want an array that maintains weak references to its items, as opposed to strong references?
I don't know of a way to do this with anything "built-in" in Cocoa. The only way I'd know of to do this is to make the array yourself, and have the storage be __weak id[]. That would automatically zero-out the place in the array when the object deallocates. If you're under the retain-release model, you could use something like MAZeroingWeakRef to get the same behavior.
This is definitely an interesting question, and I don't know of an easier answer. I'd love to be proven wrong!
Ha, I love being wrong!
There's a class called NSPointerArray that looks like it can do what you're looking for. However, it's only available on the Mac, and it only auto-zeros when you're using garbage collection.
I'll keep thinking about this. This is an interesting problem! :)
So I kept thinking about this, and came up with a solution. It uses two unconventional things:
A subclass of NSMutableArray (egads!)
Using an associated object to determine object deallocation
For the first bit, I had to to subclass NSMutableArray so that I could inject some custom logic into addObject: (and related methods). I didn't want to do this via swizzling, since NSArray and friends are a class cluster, and swizzling into/out of clusters is fraught with peril. So, a subclass. This is fine, but we're going to lose some of the awesome features we get from "pure" NSArray instances, like how they do weird things when they get big. Oh well, such is life.
As for the second bit, I needed a way for any arbitrary object to notify that it is about to or just finished deallocating. I thought of dynamically subclassing the object's class, injecting my own dealloc/finalize method, calling super, and then smashing the isa of the object, but that just seemed a little too crazy.
So, I decided to take advantage of a fun little thing called associated objects. These are to ivars what categories are to classes: they allow you to dynamically add and remove pseudo-instance variables at runtime. They also have the awesome side effect of getting automatically cleaned up with the object deallocates. So what I did is just created a little throw away object that posts a notification when it is deallocated, and then attached it to the regular object. That way when the regular object is deallocated, the throw away object will be as well, resulting in a notification being posted, which I then listen for in the NSMutableArray subclass. The notification contains a (stale) pointer to the object that is in the process of getting destroyed, but since I only care about the pointer and not the object, that's OK.
The upshot of all of this is that you can do:
DDAutozeroingArray *array = [DDAutozeroingArray array];
NSObject *o = [[NSObject alloc] init];
[array addObject:o];
NSLog(#"%ld", [array count]); //logs "1"
[o release];
NSLog(#"%ld", [array count]); //logs "0"
The source is on github, and it should (theoretically) work just as well on iOS as Mac OS X (regardless of GC mode): https://github.com/davedelong/Demos
Cheers!
... and I just thought of a way to do this without a custom subclass, but I'm tired and will post the updated answer tomorrow.
the next morning...
I've just updated the project on Github with an NSMutableArray category that allows you to create a true NSMutableArray that auto-zeroes its objects as they're deallocated. The trick was to create a CFMutableArrayRef with a custom retain callback that sets up the proper observation, and then just cast that CFMutableArrayRef to an NSMutableArray and use that (ah, the magic of Toll-Free Bridging).
This means you can now do:
NSMutableArray *array = [NSMutableArray autozeroingArray];
I added a typedef to define these as NSAutozeroingMutableArray, just to make it explicitly clear that while this is an NSMutableArray, it doesn't retain its objects like a normal NSMutableArray. However, since it's just a typedef and not a subclass, you can use them interchangeably.
I haven’t tested this, so comments are welcome.
You could use an NSPointerArray for the list (in a retain property):
self.array = [NSPointerArray pointerArrayWithWeakObjects];
When an Item object is created, it would post a notification that’s listened by your List class. Upon receiving the notification, List adds the object to the pointer array:
[array addPointer:pointerToTheObject];
In this setting, the pointer array doesn’t keep a strong reference to its elements — in particular, it doesn’t retain them. This applies to both garbage-collected and non-garbage-collected builds.
In a garbage-collected build, if an element is garbage collected then the garbage collector automatically assigns NULL to the position in the array where the object was stored.
In a non-garbage-collected build, you’ll need to manually remove the element or assign NULL to the position in the array where it was stored. You can do this by overriding -[Item dealloc] and posting a notification that the object is being deallocated. Your List class, upon receiving the notification, would act upon it.
Note that, since objects are not owned by the pointer array, you must keep a strong reference to (or retain) them if you want to keep them alive.
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)
Is there any way to detect when an NSView will be dealloc'ed?
The reason is, I have some simple delegates (such as an NSTextField delegate that handles -control:textView:doCommandBySelector: to allow the return/tab keys to be entered). I'd like to just stick this delegate object in the nib, wire up the NSTextField's delegate connection and have it work.
And it does work, but the delegate is never released even after the NSTextField it is linked to is released, so the delegate object leaks.
I'd like the delegate object to be able to detect when the NSTextField is dealloc'ed, but I can't think of any way to do this, which leaves me having to store a separate link to the delegate object from some other controller and manually release it at some point which is very much less than ideal. Any ideas?
I've had a good look for this previously, and there doesn't appear to be any way to observe when an object is deallocated. I have seen one way to do it in a weak pointer class, but it involves isa swizzling, which can get nasty. Here is the website: http://www.cocoadev.com/index.pl?WeakPointers
Objects that are created from a nib file should be deallocated when the owner of the nib is deallocated, unless they are retained elsewhere. For example, when an NSWindowController is deallocated it will release any objects that were created when the nib was loaded. If your delegate objects aren't being deallocated, maybe it's because they are retained elsewhere, or there is a retain cycle.