On Mar 3, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Eli Bach2 wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jens Alfke wrote: > >> I filed a bug report* saying that this substring optimization shouldn’t be >> used if the source string uses an external buffer, just as it shouldn’t if >> the source string is mutable. They fixed it, but some people there argue >> that their original implementation was correct (even if not compatible with >> Apple’s.) I’m curious, so I’m asking here to see if anyone knows for sure >> what’s intended. > > Well, you can argue that the substring can't just reference the original > string and bump it's retaincount to make sure the underlying data stays > around because the original string doesn't own the data buffer. For it to be > 'correct', there would at least need to be some mechanism to notify the data > buffer owner that another object was using it.
I’m not sure I’d want that either, though. If the original string was a 200-page dissertation and you took a one-word substring from it, it doesn’t seem reasonable to keep the whole 200-page dissertation all in RAM just to keep the one-word substring around. Charles _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
