-- example.h --
@property ( copy ) NSString *string;
@property ( retain ) Object *object;
-- example.m --
( void ) do {
/开发者_运维百科/ I have used 'string' and 'object' using their setter method several times.
}
( void ) dealloc {
[ string release ]; // Should I write this code?
[ object release ]; // Should I write this code?
}
They didn't use alloc, copy, new. But they are pointing latest objects that were made in their setter method and not released. I really want to know about this situations though it is not very important.
You did not @synthesize
these @property
s, so your code will not work. - Add a @synthesize
directive like so:
@synthesize string, object;
Yes, you should send them the release
message in -dealloc
in this case, because you're using copy
and retain
, which both obtain ownership of the receiver.
- (void) dealloc {
[string release];
[object release];
[super dealloc];
}
ALSO DO NOT FORGET TO INVOKE [super dealloc]
AT THE BOTTOM OF YOUR -dealloc
METHOD!!
yes, you should release both in this example.
Yes, because your NSString *string
is a copy
property and your NSObject *object
is a retain
property. By using their setters, your instance copies and retains the objects you assign to them respectively.
Because you @synthesized
your properties, remember assigning the property to nil
will release it for you, and ensure that code cannot continue to use it.
- (void) dealloc {
string = nil;
object = nil;
[super dealloc];
}
If you had instance variables (iVars), then you should use release
since there is no setter accessor that will release it for you.
精彩评论