#property (nonatomic,copy) NSString *orginalString;
..
NSString *tmpString =[[NSString alloc] init];
self.orginalString=tmpString;
[tmpString release];
NSString *newString =self.orginalString;
What happens here to newString?, is this correct what I am doing?
orginalString retain count 1 at first, and when it is referenced with another pointer "newString" its retain count will be 2? do I need to say "self.orginalString=nil" in the end? there are serious memory leaks but dont know it is something related with this.
NSString *tmpString =[[NSString alloc] init];
tmpString is allocated and initialized
self.orginalString=tmpString;
the string pointed to by tmpString is copied over to self.originalString (because the property is declared copy);
[tmpString release];
the string pointed to by tmpString is released, correctly; nothing happens to the string pointed to by self.orginalString;
NSString *newString =self.orginalString;
a new pointer is created and initalized to point at the same string pointed to by self.orginalString; nothing happens to self.orginalString retain count; it's just a second pointer pointing to the same object;
at this point, if you don't release somewhere self.orginalString, it will be leaked.
When you are dealing with memory management in OBjective C, my suggestion is not try and reason in terms of "retain count"; retain count is just the mechanism that is used by the ObjC runtime to keep track of objects; it is too low-level and there are too many other objects around to increase or decrease the retain count, so that you immediately loose count.
The best way, IMO, is reasoning in terms of ownership: when an object wants ownership of another, it will send a retain; when it has done with it, it sends release. Ownership is a local concept to a class, so it is easy to track down.
So, when you do:
NSString *newString =self.orginalString;
newString is just a pointer to a not-owned object; you do not need to balance that assignment with a release; on the contrary, if you do:
NSString *newString = [self.orginalString retain];
you are making yourself responsible for releasing the object when you have done with it.
You should visit this link. Actually, we should not check memory leaks with retain count, atleast for NSString.
To check memory leaks, always use Instruments coming with Xcode.
Related
So I just got asked this at an interview today and after some googling am still unable to figure out the answer (in fact I couldn't even find any code at all which used the [NSString string] method).
What is the difference between
NSString *someString = [NSString string];
NSString *someString = [[NSString alloc] init];
Now my initial thoughts were that [NSString string] would return an object which would be autoreleased whereas using alloc and init would return an object which has been retained. However it seems that this answer was incorrect.
I've looked at the NSString class reference in the apple docs but all it says is
Returns an empty string.
+ (id)string
Return Value
An empty string.
Could somebody explain to me exactly what the difference between these two are?
Was that your response, and did you ask why your answer was incorrect? I ask because your assumption is mostly correct (at a higher level).
It's not exactly 'retained' when returned from alloc+init, it is an object you hold one reference to, and should balance with a release or autorelease. For the convenience constructor (+[NSString string]), you are returned an object which you hold zero references to, but one which you can expect to live until the current autorelease pool is popped unless you send it an explicit retain (assuming MRC or ARC, since it is tagged iOS).
At the lower level, you could make some guesses, but I wouldn't expect that question in many objc interviews (unless you told them you were mid or senior level). Basically, it is implementation defined, but both forms could return the same static, constant NSString (that may have been what the interviewer was looking for). To illustrate:
#implementation NSString
static NSString * const EmptyNSString = #"";
- (id)init
{
self = [super init];
[self release];
return EmptyNSString;
}
+ (id)string
{
return EmptyNSString;
}
...
Again, that's implementation defined, but an obvious optimization. As well, that optimization makes physically subclassing concrete immutable types (NSString) difficult for mutable variants (NSMutableString) in some cases.
Now my initial thoughts were that [NSString string] would return an object which would be autoreleased
Technically, it’s a placeholder string that is constant, i.e., it lives throughout the entire program execution, never being released. It’s not an autoreleased string. Conceptually, and this is what I’d focus as an interviewer, it’s a string (an empty string) that is not owned by the caller, hence the caller shouldn’t release it.
whereas using alloc and init would return an object which has been retained
Technically, it’s a placeholder string that is constant, i.e., it lives throughout the entire program execution. In fact, it’s the same object as the one above, and it is not retained. Conceptually, and this is what I’d focus as an interviewer, it’s a string (an empty string) that is owned by the caller, hence the caller is responsible for releasing it when it’s not needed any longer.
The correct answer is that
NSString *someString = [NSString string];
gives you an empty string that you do not own and that you must not release (according to the memory management rules)
whereas
NSString *someString = [[NSString alloc] init];
gives you an empty string you do own and that you must release (according to the memory management rules).
Without poking into the implementation, you can't say anything else about those two strings. You can't say that they are autoreleased, because they might not be and you can't say what the retain count will be.
In actual fact, you'll probably get (in both cases) the same pointer to a constant object of some NSString subclass, probably with a retain count of UINT_MAX which is used by the run time as a flag to disable normal retain release behaviour for constant strings. I haven't actually tried the above because nobody except the maintainers of the Objective-C SDK needs to care.
You don't often see
NSString *someString = [NSString string];
because it's the same as
NSString *someString = #"";
which is shorter. It's usually used to create an empty NSMutableString
NSMutableString* s = [NSMutableString string];
The only thing I can imagine is that:
Won't allocate memory since it is not made with alloc. It is a constant (an empty string) made by the system and doesn't need to be released.
You allocate the memory for the NSString yourself which means you have to keep track if the NSString still 'lives' or not when you are done with it, and thus need to release it.
What is the right way to get an NSString object from an NSArray, keeping Memory Managment in mind.
Suppose I have an array
NSArray *myNewArray = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:.......];
Now I want to get an object from this NSArray at index 2.
NSString *nameString = [myNewArray objectAtIndex:2]; // is it the right way? how to deal with "nameString"
// now regarding memory managment, should I release it ?
OR I should first alloc nameString and then assign value to it ?
Check out the Cocoa Memory Management rules (how many times have I started a post with that sentence?). In particular
You only release or autorelease objects you own.
You take ownership of an object if you create it using a method whose name begins with “alloc”, “new”, “copy”, or “mutableCopy” (for example, alloc, newObject, or mutableCopy), or if you send it a retain message.
You use release or autorelease to relinquish ownership of an object. autorelease just means “send a release message in the future” (specifically: when the used autorelease pool receives a drain message—to understand when this will be, see “Autorelease Pools”).
Does the method objectAtIndex: begin with "alloc"? No. Does it begin with "new"? No. Does it begin with "copy" or "mutableCopy"? No. Have you sent retain to the returned object? No.
Therefore you do not own nameString. Therefore you must not release or auto release it.
Sorry if the above seems a bit "leading by the nose" but when I first started with Objective-C, I found it useful to pretty much go through all the above in my head in exactly that way, otherwise I tended to get it wrong. It doesn't take long for it all to become second nature.
I think you don't totally get the "pointer" concept yet. Your variable nameString is just a pointer. Not a string.
In the line :
NSString *nameString = [myNewArray objectAtIndex:2];
You just assign the pointer to the actual memory address of the second object of the array. That's all.
If you are about to keep this object alive (even if the array will be deallocted), you better retain that object.
NSArray *myNewArray = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:.......];
NSString *nameString = [myNewArray objectAtIndex:2]
[myArray release];
That's it, no need to bother any more with it. NSString will be released by environment itself.
There is no need to allocate or initialize NSString object and after all if you are not allocating any memory then there is no need to release....Only release NSArray objects nothing else....
You are going through right way...
There is no need to release the nameString.You only release when you are using(alloc”, “new”, “copy”, or “mutableCopy”) .
NSArray *myNewArray = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:.......];
and getting value in NSString from any of index wont affect memory ...no need to allocate here.
The collected NSString need not required to be retained until you are passing its ownership to another controller/object.
NSAutoreleasePool * pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
NSString * str = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"test"];
[str release];
int i = 999999999;
while(i-- > 0) {}
NSLog(#"%#", str);
[pool drain];
Output: test
Why didn't release work?
How can I immediately delete the object from memory?
Xcode Version 4.0 iPhone Application
~SOLVED~
Thank's to all for answers.
I've got a lot of useful information about this question. I'm going to use NSString *str = #"text" instead of NSString *str = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"text"];
i've understood that release just "marks" memory as "willing to be freed", but not freeing it immediatly
It did work. You have relinquished ownership of that object, and when the system determines that it is no longer owned, it will be marked available for reuse by the system. That may happen immediately, if you were the only owner of the string. It may happen at some later point, if creation of the string caused it to be autoreleased internally. Or, as Dave DeLong points out, the system may optimize it into an object that is never released.
In your case, it's being optimized into a constant string, which will exist for the life of the program. If you were to use an NSMutableString instead of an NSString, you'd see funky behavior that would probably not crash, but wouldn't print what you expected. (See this question for an example.)
If you used an NSArray instead, it would be deallocated when you called release, but you'd still see your NSLog example work correctly until you allocated some other object. Deallocation just marks the memory as available for reuse; it doesn't actually clear it out. So if you passed the array to NSLog, that memory hasn't been changed and thus it still prints correctly.
The key point in all of this, though, is to recognize that calling release will not necessarily cause the object to be deallocated. It may continue to exist for any number of reasons. But once you call release, you have relinquished ownership of the object. If you continue using it after that point, the system is free to do all sorts of weird things at its own will, as demonstrated.
Release does work but what you are attempting to do has undefined behavior, and when using a NSString and a literal you may also get different behavior. What is happening is although your object is released the memory at that location is reclaimable and has not changed and when it goes to print it it is still valid. Since it is a NSString a message to description is not necessarily sent and that is why you are not getting an exception for attempting to message a deallocated object.
This question has some good information about NSString and NSLog.
When you do:
NSString * str = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"test"];
This gets optimized into:
NSString * str = #"test";
You can't release a constant string, because it's hardcoded into the application binary.
Proof:
NSString *s = [NSString alloc];
NSLog(#"%p", s);
s = [s initWithString:#"foo"];
NSLog(#"%p", s);
s = #"foo";
NSLog(#"%p", s);
Logs:
2011-04-12 10:17:45.591 EmptyFoundation[6679:a0f] 0x100116370
2011-04-12 10:17:45.599 EmptyFoundation[6679:a0f] 0x100009270
2011-04-12 10:17:45.604 EmptyFoundation[6679:a0f] 0x100009270
You can see that the result of +alloc is different from the result of -initWithString:, and the result of -initWithString: is equivalent to the constant string. Basically, -initWithString: says "aha, i'm going to be an immutable string, and I'm being given an immutable string! I can just take a shortcut, destroy myself, and return the parameter, and everything will still work the same"
You're using a bad pointer in you NSLog(). You happen to be getting lucky in this case, but you should expect code like this to crash or fail in other ways.
There is no need to delete the memory block, this will use up an unneeded cycle.
The memory will be overridden when an new object is allocated an occupy that memory block.
if I create an nsmutablestring and then release it , shouldn't the retain count be 0?
my retain count stays 1.
NSMutableString *text = [[NSMutableString alloc]init];
[text release];
NSLog(#"retain count %d ", [text retainCount]);
Am I missing something ?
thanks.
There's no guarantee that retainCount will return the correct value at any point during the object's lifecycle. If you've created an NSMutableString using [[NSMutableString alloc] init] and you're calling release on it once, you're doing the right thing and shouldn't worry about it.
Apple says in its documentation that retainCount is of no use for memory management purposes because the frameworks and autorelease pools can keep hold of an object even if you have released it. http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/Foundation/Protocols/NSObject_Protocol/Reference/NSObject.html#//apple_ref/occ/intfm/NSObject/retainCount
Since you're doing this for debugging purposes, I'd suggest that you use categories to add some test code to an existing class. Any time you manually retain or release your object, you could call your new methods and use that to track your memory usage.
In my own iPhone Application I have used a number of nsstring variables to store values. But sometimes its value becomes Invalid! Does anybody know what may be the reason? Or tell me about the situation when a nsstring variable becomes Invalid?
NSStrings are also objects. They go by the same memory management rules. If you sin against those rules you will get a pointer to invalid memory and it will look like "invalid" data.
For example:
myString = [NSString stringWithString:#"foo"];
This will create an NSString* that's got autorelease on. When you're assigning it to an ivar that autorelease pool will soon pop putting the retain count back to 0 and dealloc'ing it while you still have a reference to it!
Naughty.
Instead, either retain it or use:
myString = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#""];
This returns an owning reference. Remember to [myString release]; in dealloc.
This is just one example/case of bad memory management. Read the docs on how to properly manage your object lifecycle. Really.
They are being autoreleased. If you create a string using a convenience method (stringWithString, stringWithFormat) it will be added to the autorelease pool.
To stop it being released automatically, sent it a retain message and a release message when you have finished using it so that the memory is released. You can also set up properties to do this semi automatically when you assign the string to a member variable
There are a lot of articles on iPhone (and Mac) memory management here on SO and on the interwebs. Google for autorelease.
If this is for a device with fairly limited resources such as the iPhone, you should use [[NSString alloc] init*] over the static convenience methods, as you will put less pressure on the autorelease pool and lower your memory usage. The pool is drained every message loop, so the less objects to enumerate the better.
You should also be aware that autorelease objects in a loop will generate a lot of garbage unless you manage a local autorelease pool.
did you copy or retain the NSString ?
I asked the same question. And the following answer was the best of convenience. Just use:
[myString retain];
And then in dealloc method (e.g. viewDidUnload):
[myString release];