On 18 Feb 2010, at 10:42, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: > > On 18 Feb 2010, at 10:33, David Chisnall wrote: > >> On 18 Feb 2010, at 09:09, Fred Kiefer wrote: >> >>> base/NSNumber/basic.m: >>> FAIL: Object 0 of class 'NSNumber' is retained by copy with other zone >> >> >> This one is mine, but I'm not certain that the behaviour it is expecting is >> correct. Shouldn't copyWithZone: in a different zone always result in a >> real copy? Not doing this makes zones somewhat useless. > > I think zones *are* somewhat useless... > > There are a *lot* of cases where OSX Foundation does not honor them. > > They are unused when garbage collecting is enabled anyway. > > Also, I strongly suspect that modern computer cache designs mean that the > supposed benefit of zones (being able to allocate a group of objects close > together in physical memory) has mostly been a fiction for many years now.
PS. the above test is checking conformance with OSX behavior This will be a cached NSNumber (one of the small integer values), and presumably OSX will just return the cached value rather than a copy of it, because they think that using cached values is more important than using the correct zone. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
