On Mittwoch, August 7, 2002, at 03:49 Uhr, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: > > It *was* modified to behave the same way as the MacOS-X implementation > (slightly different from > what the MacOS-X documentation says) and documented. > > The problem here is not with the retain/release/dealloc in NSObject, > rather it is that the implementations > of NSNotificationCenter differ slightly (though I've now rewritten the > GNUstep stuff to be like the > MacOS-X stuff). > > The order of execution went like this - > > [...] > > However ... this is not really a gnustep bug ... rather it's > highlighting > the fact that it's generally bad to do anything in a dealloc method > which could > conceivably cause the object being deallocated to be retained and > released later - > so good practice (where you *must* pass the object being deallocated to > other methods) > is to at least create/destroy an autorelease pool around those > methods - that doesn't > eliminate all possible problems, but it deals with most.
Hi Richard, just came back from a short trip to Barcelona. Thanks for the fix. Regarding your advise - you're perfectly right here. I wouldn't regard doing stuff like that as "best practice" either. However, in one particular case - dealloc notifications - it's exactly what one needs to do. In my case I have to inform proxies of a connection death (which occurs i.e. as a side effect of that connection being dealloced, hence the notification death is actually posted in that notification's -(void)dealloc). Such is life (or death). ;-) Cheers, Marcus -- Marcus Mueller . . . crack-admin/coder ;-) Mulle kybernetiK . http://www.mulle-kybernetik.com Current projects: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Bug-gnustep mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep
