>>> // 1) >>> self.serialIDs = [[IRMSerialDetailsDO alloc] init]; >> >> The alloc method allocates an instance with a retain count of 1, and >> assigning it to the serialIDs property bumps it up to 2. In your >> dealloc method, you will [hopefully] send it a release message which >> puts it back at 1, but this means the object still survives (i.e. it >> is not deallocated). >> >>> // 2) >>> IRMSerialDetailsDO *mySerialIDDO = [[IRMSerialDetailsDO alloc] init]; >>> self.serialIDDO = mySerialIDDO; >>> [mySerialIDDO release]; >> >> Here, the alloc creates the instance with a retain count 1, assigning >> it to the property bumps it up to 2, and the release right afterwards >> puts it back down to 1. In your dealloc method, you will sent it >> another release message which puts it at 0, and therefore the instance >> is deallocated. >> > > This is at best misleading, and illustrates why people are typically > discouraged from reformulating the memory management rules. >
I apologise. I was going to explain each one in terms of ownership, but I couldn't figure out a way to explain how you own something twice without talking about reference counts. I should probably refrain from replying to the list any time in the morning. _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
