I am trying to write text using a Core Graphics context. I can do it the first time, no problem, but the second time crashes my iPhone app. Here is a code snippet:
NSString *name = [MyClass getName];
const char *cname = [name UTF8String];
[self drawText:context text:cname];
MyClass and drawText are custom classes/methods but you get the idea. These three lines live in drawRect:
The first time drawRect: is executed, I see the text as expected. However, on any refresh of drawRect:, the line:
const char *cname = [name UTF8String];
causes my app to crash with the cryptic, "GDB: Program loaded." status message.
I get a similar response even when I use the getCString: method. I think I might be missing a fundamental understanding of NSString to char array conversion.
It sounds like you're trying to call methods on an object which has been deallocated already. The UTF8String message has the problem that you can't hold onto the returned pointer, since it may become invalidated when the string is released -- you have to copy the string if you need to hold onto it. However, getCString:maxLength:encoding: does not have that problem.
Make sure you're following properly memory management protocol. See the Memory Management Programming Guide for Cocoa, and double-check that you're sending retain, release, and autorelease messages to the proper objects at the proper times. Chances are you're sending an extra release or autorelease when you shouldn't be, or you're forgetting to retain your string somewhere.
The most likely cause is that you're keeping a reference to the previously returned char* and you are dereferencing it on the second call. According to spec, the pointer is not valid to store: The returned C string is automatically freed just as a returned object would be released; you should copy the C string if it needs to store it outside of the autorelease context in which the C string is created.
Related
I have a beginner's question about releasing variables and not wasting memory...
I don't quite understand when to release variables. I understand that I should always do this if I have assigned them in my header file (in my #interface section and my #property commands). I release them in my -(void)dealloc function.
However, what am I supposed to do with variables that I happen to use in some of my methods, e.g.:
for (int temp = 0; temp < 3; temp++) {
// do something...
}
[temp release];
This is obviously wrong (at least xCode tells me so), as 'temp' is undeclared. But why? I've declared it as an int and temp thus takes up space in my memory, I'm sure. How do I tell the program to free up the space temp has taken after I don't need it anymore? I'm sure this is obvious, but I simply don't get it.
I'd be very happy for any suggestions for a beginner of how not to be a memory pig and to have 'memory leaking' everywhere in my apps...
You declared it as an int in the scope of the loop. Once the loop is done, it goes out of scope.
Also, you can not release an int, which is a primitive type. You can only release a subclass of NSObject. A good rule of thumb is that you eventually have to release anything that you called alloc or retain on.
Edit: For your edification, memory management only applies to objects allocated from the heap. That would be NSObjects obtained via "alloc" or must C-level memory allocated with something like "malloc()". Declaring a variable like "int x" is called an "auto" variable in that is is created on the stack and will AUTOmatically disappear then that block ends (the end of a "block" being the end of the function or perhaps the end of a {} pair or even the end of a for/if/while block.
Since Objective-C is basically just a special version of C (with messages), it does not create permanent objects unless you explicitly tell it to. This is different form languages like Python or Javascript.
You only need to release objects, and temp is an int, not an object.
As far as when to release objects, Apple's docs explain that better than I can: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/MemoryMgmt/MemoryMgmt.html
You do only release objects, and not primitive types. For example you create an array with
NSArray *myArray = [[NSArray alloc] init];
This initialization allocated memory which you have to free after your done using your array, it's your responsibility, else there will be memory leaks. You can do that in the dealloc section of a controller, or at the end of a method, or even after you've enumerated through the array and no longer need it.
If you create instances of objects with other methods than alloc, copy or new(rarely used) you have to release them. If you call retain yourself on an object you have to release it as well.
Please refer to apples memory management rules, which have been posted earlier.
There are two ways to store information in RAM in C and c like things, primitives which are allocated automatically by the compiler, and memory chunks allocated by you in your program.
Variables allocated for you by the compiler are called "automatics" and can be marked by the essentially unused (because it is the default) "auto" keyword. Automatics are bound to the scope in which they are declared and go away when it ends. Regular variables, like "int x" are automatic.
Notably, pointers are typically automatic. However, the things they point to are not. Those would be the thing you asked to be allocated.
In objective-c, things are allocated with the alloc message. However, sometimes a class will call this for you, so you might not see it. To help make it clear what you should do, there is a tradition: If you get an object where you alloc'ed it, got it from a class method with the word "copy" in the method name, or sent it a "retain" message, then you own a share of it, and it won't go away until you send it a release message.
If you didn't get the object through one of those means, you must not release it, because you don't have a share in it.
So, in summary: regular variables (int, short, char, double, float, long) are automatic, no need to allocate it. Pointers are also automatic, however, the things they are pointing to are not. In obj-c, you own a share if you alloc'ed it, copy'ed it, or sent it a retain message.
You can't release an integer...
Release works only with instance of Objective-C classes.
Variables such as integers are placed on the stack, and they does not persist after a function/method call, unless allocated explicitely.
You only release objects. If you use the alloc, init procedure to create an object you must release it. If you retain an object you must release it. If you use a method that has the word "create" in it, you must release it. Anything else, the system will handle for you.
Primitives do not need to be released, only objects.
Biggest thing to keep in mind is that whenever you "alloc" or "retain" an object, put a corresponding "release" or "autorelease".
you see an error on the line [temp release]; because temp is not in scope. temp will not be seen outside of the for loop you created.
you do not need to clean up the memory of temp, since you have not claimed ownership of it(see Memory Management Rules): http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/general/conceptual/DevPedia-CocoaCore/MemoryManagement.html
examples of objects where you do not need to release/manage memory:
NSArray *myArray = [NSArray array];
NSNumber *myNumber = [NSNumber numberWithInt:5];
NSString *myString = #"Hello World";
NSInteger i = 5;
int x = 2;
examples of objects where you do need to release/manage memory:
NSArray *myArray = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:#"Hello", #"World", nil];
NSNumber *myNumber = [[NSNumber alloc] initWithInt:5];
NSString *myString = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"Hello World"];
-
typically, when your completely done using an object you own, you clean up its memory
see apple's docs for explanations on properties: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/ObjectiveC/Chapters/ocProperties.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30001163-CH17-SW1
setting a property with assign or readonly: you should not worry about releasing its memory, as you don't own it
property with retain or copy: you claim ownership of the object and need to release it at some point
this answer won't answer/solve all memory management questions/concerns, but it may shove you in the right direction
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.
So, I'm fairly certain that if I plan on manipulating strings often, such as with stringByAppendingString, I should be using variables of type NSMutableString.
But what if I'm doing something like this?
UILabel *someLabel = [[UILabel alloc] init];
[someLabel setText: [[someDictionary objectForKey:#"some_key"] stringByAppendingString:#"some other string"];
I read that if you use stringByAppendingString on an NSString, you end up with leaks because the pointer associated with the initial NSString moves around, pointing to the new string created by the append, whereas with NSMutableString, your pointer always points to that mutable string.
So my question is, what is implicitly happening when I call stringByAppendingString on something that is a string, but not explicitly an NSString or an NSMutableString? Such as, in my above case, the value of some key in a dictionary. Is doing this wrong, and should I be doing something like below?
[[[NSMutableString stringWithString:[someDictionary objectForKey:#"some_key"]] stringByAppendingString:#"some other string"]]
I read that if you use
stringByAppendingString on an
NSString, you end up with leaks
because the pointer associated with
the initial NSString moves around,
pointing to the new string created by
the append, whereas with
NSMutableString, your pointer always
points to that mutable string.
That sounds like the advice of someone who didn't quite have a grasp of what is going on with the memory management. Sure, [NSString stringByAppendingString] returns a new string. But what you do with that new string is up to you. You could certainly cause a memory leak by reassigning the result to a retained property in a careless fashion, like so:
myStringProperty = [myStringProperty stringByAppendingString:#" more bits"];
The correct form would be to use self, like so:
self.myStringProperty = [myStringProperty stringByAppendingString:#" more bits"];
Follow the cocoa memory guidelines.
As for dictionaries and other collection types: treat what comes out of the dictionary appropriately given the type you know it to be. If you pull an object out which is actually an NSString, but try to use it as a NSMutableString, your app will fall over (with 'selector not found' or similar). So in that case, you do need to make a new NSMutableString from the NSString.
Interesting note: Apple chose to make NSMutableString a subclass of NSString. Something about that seems unwise to me -- if something looks to be immutable, because it has type NSString, I want it to be immutable! (But in fact it could be NSMutableString.) Compare that to Java, which has a String class and a completely separate BufferedString class.
I've always been a fan of [NSString stringWithFormat#"%#%#", a, b]; because then you clearly get a new autoreleased string and can dispose of "a" and "b" correctly.
With [someDictionary objectForKey:#"some_key"], you will be getting the type of object that was put into that dictionary originally. So blindly calling stringByAppendingString without knowledge of what's in that dictionary seems like a bad idea.
-stringByAppendingString is going to return you a new NSString that is distinct from both strings involved. In other words:
NSString *string3 = [string1 stringByAppendingString:string2];
string3 is an entirely new string. string1 isn't changed at all, nothing happens to its memory location or contents. The person who told you that probably just misunderstood what was going on.
[mutableString1 appendString:string2];
In this case, mutableString1 still points at the same object, but the contents of that object have been altered to include string2.
One last thing to keep in mind is that if you are using mutable strings, you should be careful with sharing references to it. If you pass your mutable string to some function which keeps a pointer to that mutable string and then your code changes that mutable string at some point in the future, the other reference is pointing at exactly the same object which means the other code will see the change as well. If that's what you want, great, but if not you must be careful.
One way to help avoid this problem is to declare your #property statements for NSStrings to be "copy" instead of "retain". That will make a copy of your mutable string before setting it in your property and the -copy method implicitly gives you a NON-mutable version, so it'll create an NSString copy of your NSMutableString.
If you follow the rules for memory management, you will be fine using stringByAppendingString. In a nutshell:
if you own an object, you need to release or autorelease it at some point.
you own an object if you use an alloc, new, or copy method to create it, or if you retain it.
Make sure you read up on Apple's Memory Management Rules.
In the first code sample in your question, you aren't using alloc, new, copy or retain on any of the NSStrings involved, so you don't need to do anything to release it. If outside of the code that you've included in the sample you are using alloc, new, copy or retain on any NSStrings, you would need to ensure that they are released later.
I am developing an iPhone application which mainly makes use of the Address Book and database. After fetching about 3000 contacts from the address book, I am attaching string tags to the contacts (5 for each). I am saving my tags in the database.
For Load testing purpose i have added 10,000 tags to the App. But during the load testing of my application, I observed some memory leaks which were not related to the Application code but represents a set of Instruction sets. Also Instruments showed Foundation as the responsible library for the Leak (Extensive use of NSString,NSDictionary,NSArray which belongs to the Foundation framework). My application crashes after 10 - 15 mins of usage.The Crash report mentions, application crashed due to low memory.
Memory profiling using CLANG shows zero leaks. How do i solve these memory leaks?
Are these leaks the real culprit behind the crash? Are there any other tools available to check memory leaks?
I often find my leaks say they're caused by Core Foundation (or any other framework for that matter) but are really my own. With the exception of the Simulator, rarely will you find excessive leaking in the frameworks.
If you open up the detail panel to the right in Instruments you may find listed your App's methods in there. That will give you indication of where it could be coming from in your code. One leak can spring many other leaks, and you may have to find the top level culprit to get rid of the lower level ones.
You should not expect Clang to do anything but find the most obvious leaks. It's very handy, but that's it, just a helpful addition to compiling.
clang is not a leak checker. It only detects a small subset of issues.
For memory leak debugging you should focus on Instruments, specifically the Object Allocation and Leaks instruments. Be sure to understand the difference between leaks and other source of high memory usage though.
Once you've determined that objects are leaking, use Instruments to examine their allocation stack trace (so you can tell what object it is), and their retain/release history.
If it's not a leak, then I suggest investigating the instructions here:http://www.friday.com/bbum/2010/10/17/when-is-a-leak-not-a-leak-using-heapshot-analysis-to-find-undesirable-memory-growth/
Most likely you have code that is creating the foundation objects. Leaks shows you the place of allocation but that is generally due to a call your code made to create the object. You can look at the call chain in Instruments and go back along the call chain until you get to your code - that is the place where you are causing the allocation. Now, for that allocation, look at your memory handling for that object: Do you release it some time later?
There are lots of ways you can fail to release memory property so it would be hard to guess which one you might be hitting. Ones I see when helping people include allocating an object and assigning it to an instance variable via a property with the retain attribute, something like this:
#property (retain) NSString* myString;
...
self.myString = [[NSString alloc] initWithString: #"foo"];
the alloc+init creates a retained object, the self.myString = increments the retain count again. If coded correctly, the dealloc method releases the property via one of:
[myString release];
or
self.myString = nil;
And that takes care of the retain added with the self.myString = but does NOT take care of the retain from creation. Solutions, ONE of the following:
myString = [[NSString alloc] initWithString: #"foo"]; // doesn't call the setter method so no assignment retain - but doesn't call the setter which might be bad if non-trivial setter.
self.myString = [[[NSString alloc] initWithString: #"foo"] autorelease];
autorelease releases the alloc+init retain.
Now of course this is a contrived example because you'd probably really use:
self.myString = [NSString stringWithString: #"foo"];
which is a class method returning an autoreleased string and avoids the problem. But the idea is to show a simple example to explain this type of issue.
There are many other ways to not release memory properly, but the advice to work your way back up the call-chain until you get to your code is the way to go look at where you are triggering the allocation of the memory and then you can figure out why you aren't releasing that properly.
Try to do some issues in u code:
1. Please avoid hide declaration like
NSString *string = [dictionary valueForKey:[dictionary2 valueForKey:#"something"]]
Correct code is:
NSString *key = [dictionary2 valueForKey:#"something"];
NSString *string = [dictionary valueForKey:key];
key = nil;
Try to avoid declaration with autorelease and local declaration like:
NSArray *array = [NSArray array];
If u do this, make sure that u have:
NSArray *array = [NSArray array];
.... some code where array is using;
array = nil;
Better idea is alloc and release immediately when u don't need object and put it to nil.
3. Check if u using correct setters. Probably better idea is avoid to using it, at my experience, deallocate class start leaks for getters and setters, which was using before.
If u post some part of u code, where u seen most leaks (instruments give u possibility to click on leaked objects and see volume of leaks in programming code) community can suggest more.
I'm somewhat new to objective-c and I'm not sure what the correct memory management for this code is.
const unsigned char * data =(const unsigned char *) [string UTF8String];
When I call free on data I get an error. Do I need to clean up after this call?
No. "UTF8String" does not contain the words alloc, copy, retain, or create. Thus, you're not responsible for that memory.
Note that if you want that data to stick around after string is released, you should copy it; by the contract, you're not responsible for that memory, but you are also not guaranteed that it will last beyond the scope of the object that gave it to you.
You do not need to free it.
In Cocoa, if a method does not contain the words alloc, init, or copy, you do not own the object that is returned from said method.
-UTF8String actually points to the cstring representation of the NSString object you are calling it on. When the object's state changes, the UTF8String also changes.
As stated in the documentation, it is automatically freed the same way an autoreleased object would be.
technically speaking, free() is used to remove memory allocated using malloc() from the heap.
malloc() was not used to allocate the memory. remember that objective-c is c with extensions.
the data variable will remain in memory based on the c language 'scoping' rules.