On Jul 9, 2013, at 5:33 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jul 9, 2013, at 17:24 , jahanian <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> +@property(weak) NSString *__weak WeakProp; >>>> + >>>> +@property(strong) NSString * StrongProp; >>> >>> Conventionally, I'd expect the __weak to disappear and the "strong" to be >>> implied instead of explicitly spelled out. >> >> __weak came from user code. migration did not generate it. removed “strong” >> from migrated attributes. > > I see that it came from user code; it should go away during the migration. > > Actually, most "weak" properties will not look like this. A weak implicit > property will have a normal signature for the getter and setter, but the > backing ivar will be __weak. > > You really can't migrate properties without looking at the setter > implementation. In that sense it's pushing more info into the interface, not > less. That is so true. Yet, migrator’s workflow allows for user to select/edit/discard the property as needed. Migrator has only knowledge of the declarations it sees. In almost all cases, implementations are not available. - Fariborz > > Jordan
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
