This must be an incredibly basic question, but I haven't found an answer I'm
convinced by (apologies if I have missed something on the list). My question
relates to window controllers, and how ownership, retain/release etc should be
managed in order to (a) be correct and (b) satisfy the static analyzer. This
has come up because it's only now that I have migrated my codebase to be
compatible with the latest version of xcode that I have been able to run the
static analyzer over it and examine the results.
I want to allocate a window + controller, and I want it to live until the user
closes the GUI window, at which point I want it to disappear and clean up after
itself. I believe that the following code does not leak memory and behaves as
intended.
@interface MyWindowController : NSWindowController <NSWindowDelegate>
{
}
@end
@implementation MyWindowController
-(id)init
{
if (!(self = [self initWithWindowNibName:@"MyNib"]))
return nil;
// Window will release self when closed, so we need to retain
an extra time here
[self retain];
return self;
}
-(void)dealloc
{
printf("Deallocated\n");
[super dealloc];
}
-(void)windowWillClose:(NSNotification*)note
{
[self autorelease];
}
@end
void TestWindowController(void)
{
MyWindowController *myWindowController = [[MyWindowController alloc]
init];
[myWindowController.window makeKeyAndOrderFront:nil];
// We own a reference to myWindow since we allocated it,
// but we have now finished all the setup we want to do
// and are relinquishing control of the window object,
// releasing it into the big wide world to live or die
// as it may.
[myWindowController release];
}
However the static analyzer complains that there is a "potential leak" of
myWindowController, because it recognises that it has a retain count of 2 when
it returns from the init method. (The same applies if I don't retain in init
and don't release in TestWindowController).
It strikes me that this would be quite a common pattern. I appreciate that the
static analyzer doesn't *know* whether there's a leak or not, but if I am
indeed correctly following a common pattern then I would have expected the
analyzer to understand what is going on.
My question then is whether I am doing things in an unconventional way here,
and/or whether there is something I could change that would help the analyzer
understand what is going on.
Many thanks
Jonny.
_______________________________________________
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
