On 25 Feb 2014, at 12:18, Robert Jordan <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 25.02.2014 11:20, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>
>> Is the above correct?
>
> Not quite. Look at this line:
>
> self.monoObject = DB_BOX_INT64(value);
>
> There is a chance that the MonoObject* remains only reachable
> from self.monoObject. This means that it might be GCed before
> a handle could be taken from it.
That’s a good point.
In my actual implementation the monoObject property uses the following setter
function, which I think gets it right.
So self.monoObject = DB_BOX_INT64(value) is equivalent to [self
setMonoObject:DB_BOX_INT64(value)];
_ preceeds a class instance variable.
-(void)setMonoObject:(MonoObject *)monoObject
{
if (_monoObject) {
mono_gchandle_free(_gcHandle);
_gcHandle = 0;
}
_monoObject = monoObject;
_gcHandle = mono_gchandle_new(_monoObject, FALSE);
}
>
> For the paranoid:
>
> self.gcHandle = mono_gchandle_new(DB_BOX_INT64(value), FALSE);
> self.monoObject = mono_gchandle_get_target(self.gcHandle);
>
Are there any actual situations where this is advised?
If the collector is doing its stuff it shouldn’t ever be necessary.
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
Mono-list maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
