On Feb 3, 2014, at 10:42 , Matt Neuburg <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 20:15:37 -0800, Rick Mann <[email protected]> said: >> Should it ever be possible for there to be a mismatch between >> -viewWillAppear: and -viewDidDisappear:? I suppose it is possible, since the >> docs say the Appear methods aren't called in a popover in some circumstances >> (which I think is really bad). > > Certainly sometimes +viewWillAppear:+ or +viewWillDisappear:+ arrives without > the corresponding +viewDidAppear:+ or +viewDidDisappear:+. I filed a bug on > this a couple of years ago and was told that this was working as expected: > nothing in the contract guarantees that "will" will be followed by "did", > they told me, though I tried to argue that the contract is right there in the > name. As you say, it's really bad; please, please file a bug. The guy giving > the WWDC videos on this topic a frighteningly cavalier attitude about this; > he seems impervious to any understanding of the fact that we need coherent > reliable order and sequence for these events. m.
Done: 15970823 -- Rick
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list ([email protected]) 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
