Is callback an autoclosure, or just a regular argument?
-Kenny
> On Mar 3, 2017, at 1:14 PM, Alex Johnson via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
> Hi list members,
>
> During code review today, I noticed a really subtle memory leak that looked
> like:
>
> self.relatedObject = RelatedObject(callback: relatedObjectDidFinish)
>
> Where `relatedObject` is a strong reference, `callback` is an escaping
> closure, and `relatedObjectDidFinish` is a method of `self`. From a memory
> management perspective, this code is equivalent to:
>
> self.relatedObject = RelatedObject(callback: {
> self.relatedObjectDidFinish })
>
> In the second example, an explicit `self.` is required. It’s my understanding
> that this is to highlight that the closure keeps a strong reference to
> `self`. But, when passing a method, there is no such requirement, which makes
> it easier to accidentally create a retain cycle.
>
> This made me wonder if an explicit `self.` should be required when passing a
> method as an escaping closure. And whether that would help in the same way
> that the explicit `self.` *inside* the closure is intended to.
>
> If it were required, the code in the first example would be:
>
> self.relatedObject = RelatedObject(callback: self.relatedObjectDidFinish)
>
> What do you think?
>
> Alex Johnson
> ajohn...@walmartlabs.com <mailto:ajohn...@walmartlabs.com>
> ajohnson on Slack
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
