On 11 Apr 2008, at 18:27, Quincey Morris wrote:
On Apr 11, 2008, at 09:51, Alastair Houghton wrote:
It doesn't, but you might conceivably have methods that take an
NSEnumerator and do something with the objects it returns. Hence
the utility of nextObject.
Ah, I see - simultaneous
On Apr 12, 2008, at 08:36, Alastair Houghton wrote:
or even
-(void)discard;
Anyone have any preferences? I quite like -discard.
discard sounds so ... cruel. :)
surrender?
derez? (j/k)
How about unleash? That also contains a verb which could be used to
describe the overall technique.
Hi all,
On a number of occasions I've found myself in a situation where I have
a data structure (often a complex one) that is implemented in C, but
for which I want an ObjC wrapper. As an example, let's consider a
tree of nodes.
Now, obviously it would be good to provide NSEnumerator
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 6:04 AM, Alastair Houghton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Under GC, these kinds of tricks are no longer possible because there is no
-retain call any more, so no way to tell if it is safe to re-initialise and
return the same wrapper object.
Aside from re-implementing the
On Apr 11, 2008, at 08:07, Michael Ash wrote:
The obvious technique would be to stop trying to make the optimization
implicit and to make it explicit and managed by the caller instead. In
other words, you write your API so that it explicitly returns the same
object every time you call
Le 11 avr. 08 à 19:27, Quincey Morris a écrit :
On Apr 11, 2008, at 09:51, Alastair Houghton wrote:
It doesn't, but you might conceivably have methods that take an
NSEnumerator and do something with the objects it returns. Hence
the utility of nextObject.
Ah, I see - simultaneous
On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Buddy Kurz wrote:
I'm wondering if it would make sense (or be possible) to override -
retain and -release to increment/decrement your own variable in
addition to using the inherited behavior. In the GC environment,
the inherited retain does nothing but in
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Alastair Houghton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11 Apr 2008, at 16:07, Michael Ash wrote:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 6:04 AM, Alastair Houghton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Under GC, these kinds of tricks are no longer possible because there is
no
-retain
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Michael Ash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it's inherently not possible to do without destroying the
speed you're trying to gain. Due to how Apple's collector is
implemented, not generating write barriers for stack values, seeing if
an object has been
