I've been setting my property thusly:
@property (nonatomic, retain) myVar; ...what about: @property (nonatomic, copy) myVar; ? Ric. From: Ron Lue-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 11:06 AM To: Lee, Frederick Cc: cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com Subject: Re: In dealloc(): ref @property, Can I use "<property object> = nil; " vs "[<property object> release]; " ? On Oct 8, 2008, at 8:49 AM, Lee, Frederick wrote: Assuming the following: @property(retain) myVar; ... @synthesize myVar; ... -(void) dealloc { // Can I use: self.myVar = nil; // versus: [myVar release]; // ? } I've seen examples of using [myVar release]. But doesn't setting myVar = nil does the same thing? Which is the preferred way? I prefer doing [myVar release]. Mainly because I don't want setMyVar getting called during dealloc. And by this time there *shouldn't* be any KVO observers for myVar (assuming the property was observed at all before). Yea yea - you've done @synthesize here so we know that the setter doesn't do any custom work. But since we're in dealloc, we are - obviously - not running under GC. Under refcounting, if you didn't declare your property nonatomic, you're gonna take a lock during dealloc to do setMyVar:nil. -------------------------- RONZILLA _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) 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: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
