On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:49 AM, Quincey Morris <quinceymor...@rivergatesoftware.com> wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2015, at 22:21 , Ken Thomases <k...@codeweavers.com> wrote: >> >> Huh? It has to be an autorelease and not a release because the object needs >> to survive to the caller's scope. > > "Release" meant “eventual relinquishment of ownership”. Sorry if I was overly literal. > Since we’re talking about ARC, I wasn’t assuming that it would be an actual > auto-release. In the current implementation, it might be returned retained > for eventual release in the caller’s scope, I think. Code compiled with ARC has to be compatible with code that's compiled without ARC and vice versa. A getter compiled with ARC can't assume the caller was also compiled with ARC and so it can't return it retained unconditionally. There's the funky optimization between objc_autoreleaseReturnValue() and objc_retainAutoreleasedReturnValue() which has that effect conditionally if both were compiled with ARC as detected at run time, but the general form of the generated getter code is to autorelease the value. > Anyway, thanks for clarifying the main point. You're welcome. Cheers, Ken _______________________________________________ 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
