Here is my code to get Notes from AddressBook.
+(NSString*)getNote:(ABRecordRef)record {
return ABRecordCopyValue(record, kABPersonNoteProperty);
}
But in above implementation I have memory leak. So to remove memory leak I wrote following code
+(NSString*)getNote:(ABRecordRef)record {
NSString *tempNotes = (NSString*)ABRecordCopyValue(record, kABPersonNoteProperty);
NSString *notes = [NSString stringWithString:tempNotes];
[tempNotes release];
return notes;
}
If I write above code my app crashes. Whats going wrong? Thanks.
UPDATE: I call this method as follows :
notes = [AddreesBook getNote:record];
where notes is my ivar & I am releasing it in dealloc method.
Your first implementation violates the ownership rule:
Memory Management Rules
Which is to say, the API call you're using contains "Copy", but you're treating it like an autoreleased object.
Given that you're returning an autoreleased object in your revised implementation, I suspect you're not retaining your returned note string. You'll be able to tell for sure if this is the case if when running under a debugger your app crashes in NSPopAutoreleasePool().
A simple test would be to send -retain to the note object you get back and see if the crash goes away:
NSString *note = [ MyAddressBook getNote: abRecord ];
[ note retain ];
/* ... use note ... */
/* we retained the object, we must also release it when done with it. */
[ note release ];
Assuming the record parameter is correctly set, the following should return an autoreleased NSString.
+ (NSString *)getNote:(ABRecordRef)record {
return [(NSString *)ABRecordCopyValue(record, kABPersonNoteProperty) autorelease];
}
However, I'm not currently seeing why your current version of getNote isn't working.
Related
I am new to Objective C and here is my confusion:
When is it applicable to allocate memory for an instance?. Like this:
When is it applicable to use this...
NSString *str = [[NSString alloc]init];
and to use this...
- (NSString *) formatStr:(NSString *) str{
NSString *str = (NSString *) str;
...
.....
.......
}
and even creating UIActionSheet, it uses alloc but in other UI elements, it does not..
What exactly the reason and when shall it be done?
Thanks fellas.. :D
In addition to the "normal" allocation route (i.e. through [[MyClass alloc] init]) some classes provide so called "factory methods". These are class methods that allocate objects internally. The advantage of using factory methods is that they can create a suitable subclass to return to the caller. In both cases, though, the allocation is ultimately done by alloc/init.
Objective C's alloc method handles allocating memory, you don't have to worry about allocating, just managing the retain and release cycles.
checkout this About Memory Management article from Apple
when you create an instance using alloc+init OR you get an instance through a method that has init in the name (a convention, e.g. initWithString) you are said to own the object, this is, you must not retain it (its ref counter is already set to 1) and need to eventually release it when you are done with it. When you receive an instance by calling a method which hasn't get init in the name (rule on thumb but you should always check documentation) this means that you are not the owner of the object, i.e. the object might be released at any time, even while you are using it. Usually methods such as stringWithFormat will return autoreleased objects which will be around until the end of the event cycle (unless you claim ownership by calling retain on the string).
I strongly recommend reading the cocoa memory management guide.
NSString *str = [[NSString alloc]init]; //you own the object pointed to by str. Its retain count is 1. If you don't call release this will be a memory leak.
- (NSString *) formatStr:(NSString *) str{
NSString *str = (NSString *) str; //you don't own str. btw, you don't need casting here
//using str here might throw exception if its owner has released it
[str retain]; //you own str now. you can do whatever you want with it. It's yours
.......
}
After trying to print retainCount of object I get 2147483647. Why do I get such a result? It should be 1, shouldn't?
NSString *myStr = [NSString new];
NSUInteger retCount = [myStr retainCount];
NSLog(#"refCount = %u", retCount);
2011-09-08 17:59:18.759 Test[51972:207] refCount = 2147483647
I use XCode Version 4.1. Tried compilers GCC 4.2 and LLVM GCC 4.2 - the same result.
Garbage Collection option was set to unsupported.
NSString is somewhat special when it comes to memory management. String literals (something like #"foo") are effectively singletons, every string with the same content is the same object because it can't be modified anyway. As [NSString new] always creates an empty string that cannot be modified, you'll always get the same instance which cannot be released (thus the high retainCount).
Try this snippet:
NSString *string1 = [NSString new];
NSString *string2 = [NSString new];
NSLog(#"Memory address of string1: %p", string1);
NSLog(#"Memory address of string2: %p", string2);
You'll see that both strings have the same memory address and are therefore the same object.
This doesn't directly answer your question, but retainCount is not really all that useful and should not be used for testing. See this SO post for details.
When to use -retainCount?
While NSString's are an odd case (there are others in the framework) you might also run across this in other clases - it's one of the ways of creating a singleton object.
A singleton only exists once in the app and it's pretty important that it never gets released! Therefore, it will overwrite some methods of NSObject including (but not limited to):
- (id)release {
// Ignore the release!
return self;
}
- (NSUInteger)retainCount {
// We are never going to be released
return UINT_MAX;
}
This object can never be released and tells the framework that it's a singleton by having a ludicrously high retain count.
Checkout this link for more information about singleton objects.
I've seen this a couple of times regarding NSStrings, the retainCount returns the maximum count instead of the actual one when you try to look at retainCounts of strings in this manner.
Try this;
NSString *myStr = [[NSString alloc] init];
NSUInteger retCount = [myStr retainCount];
NSLog(#"refCount = %u", retCount);
Edit: Restored NSUInteger
I'm having the code as below.
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
NSArray* myarr = [self createArray];
for (NSString* str in myarr)
{
NSLog(#"%#",str);
}
[myarr release];
}
-(NSArray*)createArray
{
NSArray* arr1 = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:#"APPLE",#"MAC",#"IPHONE",nil];
return arr1;
}
When I "Build & Analyze", its showing two leaks. One at [myarr release] saying, incorrect decrement of the reference count of an object that is owned at this point. and Other at return arr1, saying, Potential leak of an object allocated on line 152 and stored into arr1.
From my above code, the method "createArray" is returning a pointer and I'm releasing it as well. Is my way of coding right or wrong?
From my above code, the method "createArray" is returning a pointer and I'm releasing it as well. Is my way of coding right or wrong?
that depends on how you look at it.
1) the ref counting looks ok
2) the static analyzer flags objc methods based on names, in some cases. so the issue will likely vanish if you rename createArray to newArray, or something named new*. so it expects a convention (the ones used by Apple) to be followed.
therefore, it's the message that's bit shallow, it doesn't really analyze the program, but bases its findings/results on convention -- and not an actual evident issue which a human can read.
If you're just using the array in your viewDidLoad method, then you don't need to alloc an array in there at all. You can just use an autoreleased array returned as 7KV7 suggested. You can return an autoreleased array in your -(void)createArray as well without alloc'ing an object. Here is an example.
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
NSArray* myarr = [self createArray];
for (NSString* str in myarr)
{
NSLog(#"%#",str);
}
}
-(NSArray*)createArray
{
return [NSArray arrayWithObjects:#"APPLE",#"MAC",#"IPHONE",nil];
}
If you don't have to alloc an object to use it, it makes for less, and cleaner code, IMO.
Try this
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
NSArray* myarr = [[NSArray alloc] initWithArray:[self createArray]];
for (NSString* str in myarr)
{
NSLog(#"%#",str);
}
[myarr release];
}
-(NSArray*)createArray
{
NSArray* arr1 = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:#"APPLE",#"MAC",#"IPHONE",nil];
return [arr1 auotrelease];
}
The problem with your code is that
You do not allocate myarr using alloc or new so you do not take ownership of the object. Hence the issue in release.
You allocate arr1 so you take ownership of the object and you return arr1. Hence you do not release it. That is the reason for the leak.
I am just reading through the Practical Memory Management guide.
I am somewhat confused by this block of code:
- (void)printHello {
NSString *string;
string = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Hello"];
NSLog(#"%#", string);
}
It seems to me that string is going to have a reference count of 0. Is this true?
What stops string from being deallocated before we call NSLog(string)?
Is this somehow equivalent to this:
- (void)printHello {
NSString *string;
string = [[[NSString stringWithFormat:#"Hello"] retain] autorelease];
NSLog(#"%#", string);
}
Edit: Similarly this code is given in the Practical Memory Management
guide:
- (NSString *)fullName {
NSString *string = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%# %#", firstName, lastName];
return string;
}
When and how does the return value get freed? Who is the owner? Does the caller of fullName need to release the string returned by full name?
Strictly speaking,
- (void)printHello {
NSString *string;
string = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Hello"];
NSLog(#"%#", string);
}
Is not equivalent to
- (void)printHello {
NSString *string;
string = [[[NSString stringWithFormat:#"Hello"] retain] autorelease];
NSLog(#"%#", string);
}
The convention is that a method should autorelease any object it returns. The only exception (AFAIK) is for constructors, which return an object with a +1 retain count. Since [NSString stringWithFormat:] returns an object. In first snippet, stringWithFormat: returns an already autoreleased object. the second snippet, you're retaining it once more and it'll be released twice (which has the same effect, but the second retain/autorelease pair is redundant).
Ok, now to answer your question. Essentially, every time UIKit calls your code, it creates an NSAutoreleasePool object. Every time you autorelease an object, its added to this pool. Finally, when your code returns back to UIKit, it calls the drain method on the pool (i.e [pool drain]) and that releases every object which has been added to the pool and deallocates the pool. Also, autorelease pools can be nested, so you can create your own pools and drain them if you're going to be creating a lot of autoreleased objects. It isn't as complicated as it sounds.
I'd highly recommend that you read the Autorelease Pools chapter in the Memory Management Guide (Which incidentally, comes right after the Practical Memory Management chapter).
First of all:
NSLog(string);
Don’t do this. (I just realized it comes right from the Apple docs. Weird.) The first argument to NSLog is the formatting string. If your string contains some percent escapes, bad things will happen. The correct, if slightly longer way is:
NSLog(#"%#", string);
Now to the point: Autoreleased objects do not have zero retain count. They have retain count 1+ and have a pending –1 operation on them that will happen “soon in the future”.
The precise meaning of “soon in the future” depends on the situation. If you’re on the main thread and there is no additional autorelease pool in place, autoreleased objects will be released on the next runloop iteration. This does not have to be the case if you have an additional release pool:
// Let’s pretend this is a long loop and you don’t want to wait
// for the autoreleased objects to be collected by the main pool.
for (…) {
NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
NSString *foo = [NSString stringWith…];
[pool drain];
// Now foo is no longer valid.
}
As for returning autoreleased objects, that’s one of the main use cases for autoreleasing. You are returning an object that will perish “soon”, but if the caller is interested, he can retain and take over the ownership. (It’s like, if you pardon the image, passing a bomb with a burning safety fuse. If the caller is interested, he’ll put out the fuse by retaining.) And if the caller is not interested, like maybe he’s ignoring an output from a function or just uses the value to construct some other object, he does not do anything and the object will get out of memory:
- (id) createObject {
return [NSString stringWith…];
}
- (void) interestedCaller {
NSString *value = [[self createObject] retain];
}
- (void) notInterestedCaller {
[self createObject]; // maybe just interested in side effects
NSString *differentString = [NSString stringWithString:[self createObject]];
}
This is really convenient and makes the manual memory management quite pleasant. You might be interested in run loops and the Objective-C tutorial by Scott Stevenson.
Whenever I read about how to avoid memory leaks, I always came across a concept that
"Number of alloc must be equal to number of release".
But I came across a concept where we require more than one release. Like What I used to practise was as follows:
(NSString*) func1
{
NSString* result = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:#"Test String"]];
return result;
}
(void) func2
{
NSString* temp = [self func1];
[temp release];
}
But I came across a concept of retain count which says that in the above case the memory is not deallocated for the string since the retain count for the string is 1 at the end. So the right practise is
(NSString*) func1
{
NSString* result = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:#"Test String"]];
[result autorelease];
return result;
}
(void) func2
{
NSString* temp = [self func1];
[temp release];
}
So now I have two releases for deallocating the memory which is a contradictory to my above sentence which I read on most of the blogs ""Number of alloc must be equal to number of release".
I am little bit confused about the above stuff. Becoz if I autorelease the string in the first function and want to use the string in second function for a long time, and what if the release pool is flushed in between, on the other side if I dont use autorelease it will still block the memory.
So whats the correct way of doing it.
At the time you call alloc whatever is returned will have a retainCount of 1. Calling release on that object will cause it to be deallocated (it's retainCount will drop to 0). In your first example, then, the second line of func2 will deallocate the NSString* you received from func1, and your memory management chores are complete.
In the second example you are tossing result in func1 into the current autorelease pool, which will cause it to become deallocated when the pool drains. You do not want to attempt to manage the memory of that object once it has been placed into the pool- it is no longer your responsibility.
If you want to generate the string and keep it around for a while (e.g., through the lifetime of several autorelease pools), I would recommend the first form of memory management.
The correct way is this:
(NSString*) func1 {
NSString* result = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:#"Test String"];
// retaincount == 1
return [result autorelease];
}
(void) func2 {
NSString* temp = [self func1];
// retaincount == 1
// temp is autoreleased, therefore no [release] is necessary.
}
Autorelease is automatically done at the end of the run loop, that means it cannot be emptied while your code is doing something. -> The code you have is safe. This isn't true for multithreaded application!
(NSString*) func1
{
NSString* result = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:#"Test String"]];
return result;
}
[result retainCount] is 1
(void) func2
{
NSString* temp = [self func1];
[temp release];
}
[temp retainCount] is 0
No need for autorelease.
From Memory Management Rules:
This is the fundamental rule:
You take ownership of an object if you create it using a method whose name begins with “alloc” or “new” or contains “copy” (for example, alloc, newObject, or mutableCopy), or if you send it a retain message. You are responsible for relinquishing ownership of objects you own using release or autorelease. Any other time you receive an object, you must not release it.
The following rules derive from the fundamental rule, or cope with edge cases:
As a corollary of the fundamental rule, if you need to store a received object as a property in an instance variable, you must retain or copy it. (This is not true for weak references, described at “Weak References to Objects,” but these are typically rare.)
A received object is normally guaranteed to remain valid within the method it was received in (exceptions include multithreaded applications and some Distributed Objects situations, although you must also take care if you modify the object from which you received the object). That method may also safely return the object to its invoker.
Use retain in combination with release or autorelease when needed to prevent an object from being invalidated as a normal side-effect of a message (see “Validity of Shared Objects”).
autorelease just means “send a release message later” (for some definition of later—see “Autorelease Pools”).
In general, I'd feel safer to do a retain on a return value, like the one in the "func 2":
(NSString*) func1 {
NSString* result = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:#"Test String"];
return [result autorelease];
}
(void) func2 {
NSString* temp = [[self func1] retain];
// Do something with temp
[temp release];
}
Is this unnecessary? I understand that in this example "temp" is just a local variable. But it could have been an instance variable, which may need to be retained.