On 01/12/2009, at 12:30 PM, Mario Kušnjer wrote: > This could not be like this, right ? > > [cell image] = [image retain];
No, because [cell image] returns a value, it does not set a value. You might consider doing this though: [cell setImage:image]; Clark is right that if the copy was a bitwise copy, this is going to over-release (or insufficiently retain, same thing), but assuming the presence of a bitwise copy that is not explicitly documented as such is an assumption too far. The docs for NSCopying state that a copy can be implemented by: • Implement NSCopying using alloc and init... in classes that don’t inherit copyWithZone:. • Implement NSCopying by invoking the superclass’s copyWithZone: when NSCopying behavior is inherited. If the superclass implementation might use the NSCopyObject function, make explicit assignments to pointer instance variables for retained objects. • Implement NSCopying by retaining the original instead of creating a new copy when the class and its contents are immutable. So doing this: cell->image = [image retain]; is actually the safest thing to do, because it works correctly whether or not the superclass used NSCopyObject, so no assumptions about the superclass implementation has to be made. I still feel that NSCopyObject is a nasty dangerous function though, and for my own classes I never implement copy that way. --Graham_______________________________________________ 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 arch...@mail-archive.com