I have a MBProgressHUD that I allocate as follows:
self.progressHUD_ = [[[MBProgressHUD alloc] initWithView:self.view] autorelease];
if I call removeFromSuperview then would I have to call progressHUD release again? Also if I declare a property with something like this:
NSString * title_;
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSString * title_;
then it is guaranteed that in my dealloc I should have a release on title right?
If progressHUD_ is a retain property, then you will have to release it in dealloc. However, the nice thing about a retain property is that you only have to set it to nil to reclaim the memory; making sure to use "self." before.
e.g.
self.<property_name> = nil;
// or in your case
self.progressHUD_ = nil;
// the following will not release it because it's not accessing the property:
progressHUD_ = nil
I do not recommend using [progressHUD_ release] because it can cause problems. e.g. if elsewhere you had released progressHUD_ and not set it to nil, you may accidentally release a pointer which is no longer allocated (dangling pointer).
I also recommend calling self.progressHUD_ = nil; in viewDidUnload which is called during low memory conditions and the view is not showing. It doesn't kill your class instance, but just unloads the view. And of course this assumes that you call self.progressHUD_ = [[[MBProgressHUD alloc] initWithView:self.view] autorelease]; in viewDidLoad rather than in init...
No, you don't have to release it again. Views retain their subviews and release them again automatically when you call removeFromSuperview. As long as the view has been autoreleased when you attach it to the view, it will be released when it is removed from the view.
I didn't quite understand your second question, but yes, you have to release any properties of type "retain" or "copy" in your dealloc statement. You have to write those release statements manually, they aren't added automatically (unless you are using ARC of course, which I strongly recommend).
How is your progressHUD_ property defined? (btw, the ivar should have a trailing underscore, but not the property name).
In case it is defined as (retain, whatever), you will have to release it again:
When you create it, its retainCount is +1.
When you assign it to your property, its retainCount will be increased by one.
When you add it as a subview to the parent view, its retainCount will be increased by one.
At some point, autorelease will eventually decrease it by 1, but the view and the property still hold on to it.
So you'll have to either set your property to nil or call release on the ivar in your dealloc method.
Also, you probably want to use copy instead of retain when defining an NSString property. And yes: you'll have to release it either way.
Related
I've been trough some tutorials and some information, but I dont have a straight answer about the best way or the best place to release variables.
Lets see this situation, I have these 2 variables:
#property (nonatomic, strong) IBOutlet UIButton *myButton;
#property (nonatomic, strong) NSString *myString;
...
#synthesize myButton = _myButton, myString = _myString;
Is this the best way of releasing them?:
-(void)viewDidUnload {
self.myButton = nil;
self.myString = nil;
[super viewDidUnload];
}
-(void)dealloc{
[_myButton release];
[_myString release];
[super dealloc];
}
I understand more than enough when dealloc is called, and when viewDidUnload is called, I just want to know if that way is correct, and why it has to be done in that way.
Thanks guys
It is recommended to not use property accessor methods in init and dealloc, since they might expect some other information in the object to exist. If you know what you are doing, there is really no problem of using self.myButton = nil also in dealloc. However, there is really no use of setting them to nil since the object is being destroyed - unless some code is accidently run from dealloc (as the accessor methods I mentioned above).
In viewDidUnload, you want to set your members to nil instead of only releasing them, since your object will continue to exist and does not want to access dangling pointers.
So, your example should be the best performance and safest way of programming.
There are other ways, such as not declaring the IBOutlets as properties, or declaring them as properties without retaining. I find that in most cases I prefer to have them be retained properties, which I then have to explicitly release. An example of this is when you switch from one view controller to another. As one view controller is dismissed, its views are removed and they are released. Any IBOutlet UILabels on that view would get released too if I don't have them retained. That means that when I flip back to the old view, I have to go through and reset my labels and controls to their last values, when I could have easily kept them saved if I just retain the IBOutlet.
I have read the documentation about the use of the viewDidUnload method. I thought I did understand the meaning of this method
1) I use retain with #propery in the .h file and #syntesize in the .m-file. I assign object with a value using self.object = something. In this case I would set self.object = nil; in the viewDidUnload method.
2) I do not retain the object in the .h-file but I am allocing and init the object in the viewDidLoad method. In the dealloc method I have the [object release]; In the viewDidUnload method I also set [object release]; because the next time the view will appear, the object will be created in the viewDidLoad method
Hope, this will help you...
my question is : i think that there is an error in this code ( it is not my code and i have not a Mac to compile ). this is the code :
....
CDAUIView *theView = [[CDAUIView alloc] initWithFrame:rectFrame];
theView.myController = self;
self.view = theView;
[theView autorelease];
when theView is released, wha about its property ( myController) ??
thanks for your answers
It all depends on the details behind the properties in question (specifically, whether the properties are declared as retain, copy or assign) — but that code looks fine, given reasonable assumptions. Under normal circumstances, setting a property will retain the object, and releasing the object might cause its properties to be released (that will happen if the object is deallocated). In this case, releasing the view shouldn't cause its myController to be released, because it's still being owned by self here. But even if it were, the release would just be balancing the retain.
An object doesn't retain its instance variables whenever it's retained, and it doesn't release them just because it's released. It retains them when it takes ownership it and releases them when it is ready to relinquish ownership.
If CDAUIView is written correctly, when it gets deallocated it will release any objects that it has retained.
I am subclassing NSURLConnection, and used MGTwitterEngine as a base to help me get started. That may be irrelevant. However, I noticed in their code they don't use #property or #synthesize for their ivars. They have wrapped the ivars in accessor methods which look like this:
- (NSString *)identifier {
return [[_identifier retain] autorelease];
}
My question is two part. First, what effect does retain followed by autorelease have? It seems to me it would cancel itself, or worse yet leak.
Second, if I were to change the header file to have:
#property (nonatomic, retain, readonly) NSString* _identifier;
And used #synthesize indentifier = _identifier, wouldn't this do the same thing as the accessor method without having to write it?
Maybe it is just two different ways to do the same thing. But I wanted to ensure I have the correct understanding. Thanks.
Using #synthesize will actually only create a setter and a getter method. The code that is auto generated for you is guaranteed to use proper memory management, so that you do not need to worry.
MGTwitterEngines use of return [[ivar retain] autorelease] is actually the correct way to do it. Lets have two examples.
Assume a getter is defined as this:
-(Foo)foo {
return foo;
}
And then we execute this code:
bar = [[bar alloc] init]; // bar has aretain count of 1.
foo = bar.foo; // foo har a retain count of 1 (owned by bar).
[bar release]; // Bar and all it's ivars are released imidiatetly!
[foo doSomething]; // This will crash since the previous line released foo.
If we instead change the getter to this:
-(Foo)foo {
return [[foo retain] autorelease];
}
bar = [[bar alloc] init]; // bar has a retain count of 1
foo = bar.foo; // foo has a retain count of 2 (one owned by bar, 1 owned by autorelease pool).
[bar release]; // Bar and all it's ivars are released imidiatetly!
[foo doSomething]; // Will not crash since foo is still alive and owned by autorelease pool.
Hope this explains why you should always return properly autoreleased objects from all your getters. It is important that any return value can survive the deallocation of it's parent, since no class ca guarantee what a client will do with it's values once it is exposed to the wild.
Retain followed by autorelease does exactly what you might think it does. It sends the object a retain message and then sends it an autorelease message. Remember that autoreleasing an object adds that object to the autorelease pool but does not release it yet. The autorelease pool will send the object a release message at the end of the current iteration of the run loop. So, a retain followed by autorelease essentially says, "Make sure this object stays around until the end of the the current iteration of the run loop." If you need the returned value to hang around longer, you can retain it. If not, do nothing and the autorelease pool will handle it.
In this case, the string being sent retain and autorelease messages is a property. It's already retained by the parent object. So you might wonder why do this retain and autorelease thing at all? Well, there's no guarantee that the object won't release _identifier before the current iteration of the run loop ends. Consider this example:
- (NSString *)identifier { return _identifier; }
- (void)aMethod {
NSString *localId = [self identifier]; // localId refers to _identifier which is only retained by self
[self methodThatChangesIdentifierAndReleasesItsOldValue]; // self releases _identifier
NSLog(#"%#", localId); // crash, because localId (old value of _identifier) has been released
}
In this case, the returned identifier isn't retained and autoreleased. The NSLog line crashes because localId refers to a released string. However, had we used retain and autorelease in the getter, there would be no crash because localId would not be released until the end of the current iteration of the run loop.
As far as I know, your replacement with an identifier property would be just as good. It might not be identical code, but the effect should be the same.
Apple explains this well in Implementing Accessor Methods. The method quoted by you (named "Technique 1" by Apple) helps avoid bugs if the caller assigns a new value to the identifier property and then expects the retrieved value to still be available. It won't be needed most of the time but just returning the ivar value can lead to bugs that are hard to track down.
Generally one retains then autoreleases if you are returning something that you didn't own the first place. It will only leak if you own _identifier and there is a mismatch of retain/alloc/etc versus release/autorelease sent to that object.
Secondly, yeah you generally don't have to write the headers if you aren't doing something special beyond what the general boilerplate looks like. Apple has good documentation on properties, I suggest if you're still fuzzy, you look at those.
I've subclassed some UITextField and added some custom properties.
In a UITableViewController, in the ViewDiDLoad I init them, and in the cellForRowAtIndexPath I add them to the cell with [cell.contentView addSubview:customTextField];
Each cell has a different customTextField as all of them are very different.
Where I should call the [customTextField release] ?
After I add them to the cell view ?
If for example I call [self.tableView reloadData] my customTextField are going to be added again to the cell, so maybe I should change my approach in doing this ?
thanks for the orientation ...
regards,
r.
You release an object when you no longer have any interest in it. This happens for many reasons; it might be because you've finished with the object, or have passed the control over the object lifetime to another object. It might be because you're about to replace the object with a fresh instance, it might be because you (the owner object) are about to die.
The last one seems to be relevant in your case. You create these object in viewDidLoad and repeatedly need them (i.e. to add them to cells) until your object is no longer functioning. In this case, just as you create them in viewDidLoad, you can release them in viewDidUnload.
Edit: I should really mention autorelease, but this isn't relevant in this instance. Memory management is best handled with a notion of 'owner' - the person who creates something (or retains it) should be responsible for deleting it (or releaseing in ObjC parlance). autorelease handle some cases where you need to give an object to an alternate owner, having previously owned it yourself (typically via a method return). If you are the creator, you can't just release it before returning it to the new owner, as it will be deleted before the new owner has a chance to stake an interest in it. However, you can't just not release it; it will leak. As such, the system provides a big list of objects that it will release on your behalf at some point in the future. You pass your release responsibility to this list, then return the object to the new owner. This list (the autorelease pool) ensures your release will occur at some point, but gives the new owner a chance to claim the object as theirs before it's released.
In your case, you have a clear interest in owning the objects for the lifetime of your view controller - you need to, at any time, be able to add them to view cells in response to a table data reload. You're only done with them when your view controller dies, so the viewDidUnload (or possibly dealloc) is the only sensible place to release them.
I always release my controls directly after I added them to a view using addSubView. When I work with tables, I also initialize them in the cellForRowAtIndexPath method.
Therefor the object stays alive the shortest time.
Adam Wright explains the theory of this very well, but let me give you some practice. You're thinking about this problem far too hard, and that almost always leads to bugs. There is a simple solution that solves this problem almost every time: Retain all ivars using accessors; don't retain non-ivars.
.h
#interface ... {
UITextField *_customTextField;
}
.m
#property (nonatomic, readwrite, retain) UITextField *customTextField;
...
#synthesize customTextField=_customTextField;
-(void)viewDiDLoad {
self.customTextField = [[[UITextField alloc] init....] autorelease];
}
...
- (void)dealloc {
// I do not recommend accessors in dealloc; but everywhere else I do
[_customTextField release]; _customTextField = nil;
}
Never access your ivars directly, except in dealloc (even that is controversial and some people recommend self.customTextField = nil; in dealloc; there are arguments either way). But never assign your ivars directly. If you will follow this rule, you will find that most of your memory problems go away.
The safest way to handle object ownership is to autorelease the view directly after initialization:
FooTextField* textField = [[[FooTextField alloc] init] autorelease];
[myCell.contentView addSubview:textField];
Adding the text field to a superview (the UITableViewCell's contentView) retains it. This way you don't have to care about releasing the view afterwards.
There seems to be a resentment against autorelease in the iPhone developer community. In my opinion, this resentment is unfounded. Autoreleasing an object adds very little overhead to the program if the objects lives longer than the current pass through the run loop.
Every object in Obj-C has a reference counter (retainCount), and when this counter goes to 0 the object is deallocated. When you allocate and initialize an object, the reference count is set to 1 - but you can retain it as many times you want to.
UITextField *textField = [[UITextField alloc] init]; // Reference counter = 1
[textField retain]; // Reference counter = 2
[textField retain]; // Reference counter = 3
The opposite of retain is release, which subtracts from the reference counter;
...
[textField release]; // Reference counter = 2
[textField release]; // Reference counter = 1
You can always get the reference counter of your objects;
printf("Retain count: %i", [textField retainCount]);
The method addSubview of UIView does retain your passed in sub view - and when it's done with it it releases it. If you need your UITextField later, in another scope (when the UIView is done with it and has released it) - you should not release it after you've added it to the super view. Most of the time you actually don't need to hold on to a reference, so you should release it after you've added it to the super view. If you dont - you can release it in the dealloc method of your scope.
Take a look at UITableView -dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier: and -initWithStyle:reuseIdentifier:.
In -tableView:cellForRowAtIndexPath:, use -dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier: and check if the result is nil. If it is, instantiate a new cell with -initWithStyle:reuseIdentifier:.
Send -autorelease to your customTextField upon creation and adding to the respective cell.
You should not add subview in cellForRowAtIndexPath! This will slow down the view as you add a subview each time the cell is displayed. Try using custom UITableViewCell class for that purpose.
Here is a perfect solution of UITableView customization
http://cocoawithlove.com/2009/04/easy-custom-uitableview-drawing.html
works jut perfectly
I have some UIImageViews that are nested in UIViews, which group them together. They're owned by an view controller. As soon as the -viewWillDisappear method is called, I want to remove those UIImageViews with their UIViews alltogether, so that the memory gets freed up.
I call -release on the UIViews that contain the UIImageViews as subviews. Nothing else owns the UIImageViews. All I have is an instance variable to the UIView which groups the UIImageViews together.
So when I send -release to it, the retain count should become 0. But that's not a guarantee that I get more free memory, right? So, I also set myUIView = nil. Is that helpful / useful? How do you free up memory safely?
The best thing to do in -viewDidDisappear (not -viewWillDisappear; you're still onscreen at that point) for this case is to call self.view = nil. That will dump the entire view controller's view, which will be automatically reloaded for you next time it's needed.
If you have any IBOutlets on those views, you need to set them to nil, too or they won't release. Assuming you have a setup like this:
#interface MyViewController : UIViewController
{
UIImageView *_imageView;
}
#property (readwrite, retain) IBOutlet UIImageView *imageView;
#implementation MyViewController
#synthesize imageView = _imageView;
Then you need to call self.imageView = nil in your `-viewWillDisappear.
You generally should not call -release on your ivars except in their accessors and in -dealloc. The correct way to release them is to set them to nil using an accessor.
Caling -release when the retainCount is 1 will immediately call free(), which will recover memory. Remember, however, that other things may be retaining the object, including the autorelease pool, so you may not be certain what the retain count is at any given time.
I strongly advise people when they release a variable to immediately set it to nil. This doesn't impact the variable; it just protects you from chasing a pointer that you've released and so may now point to unallocated memory. So in -dealloc, I have lines that look like this:
[_stuff release]; _stuff = nil;
[_otherStuff release]; _otherStuff = nil;