On Sep 2, 2014, at 10:45, Michael Hall <mik3h...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 2, 2014, at 3:29 AM, Hendrik Schreiber <h...@tagtraum.com> wrote: > >> Yes, indeed. But logic in other placed would not necessarily work as >> intended. > > I can think of no side effects on that one. All you're doing is avoiding the > crash by avoiding the CFRelease on nil. If keeping the code running has side > effects they would have to be from the original bug that you get to the code > somehow where the value ends up nil.
Exactly. I'm looking for the "real fix", not just for the fix of the symptom (that nil value we call release on). The calling code is obviously buggy, but in a non-trivial way. -hendrik
