On 2011 May 29, at 11:38, Stephen J. Butler wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Jerry Krinock je...@ieee.org wrote:
I'm really losing it; or maybe I never understood to begin with. How can
this code crash?
- (void)dealloc
{
NSLog(@0988 %p %s, self,
On May 29, 2011, at 12:20, Jerry Krinock wrote:
Ah, I get it now. It's the access to the pointer m_managedObjectContext
itself that's the problem.
So, let's look at the subclass init method which invokes -dealloc:
- (id)initWithDocUuid:(NSString*)docUuid {
NSManagedObjectContext*
On May 29, 2011, at 2:20 PM, Jerry Krinock wrote:
So, let's look at the subclass init method which invokes -dealloc:
- (id)initWithDocUuid:(NSString*)docUuid {
NSManagedObjectContext* moc ;
moc = [[BkmxBasis sharedBasis] exidsMocForIdentifier:docUuid] ;
self = [super
On May 29, 2011, at 2:43 PM, Quincey Morris wrote:
The difference in the second case is that the compiler translates it (AFAIK)
into a call to objc_msgSendSuper instead of objc_msgSend. What I'm winding up
to here is that the failure in messaging a nil 'super' looks to me like a bug
in the
On May 29, 2011, at 12:20, Jerry Krinock wrote:
- (id)initWithDocUuid:(NSString*)docUuid {
NSManagedObjectContext* moc ;
moc = [[BkmxBasis sharedBasis] exidsMocForIdentifier:docUuid] ;
self = [super initWithManagedObjectContext:moc
On May 29, 2011, at 12:57, Ken Thomases wrote:
But it's important to recognize that there are good arguments on both sides
and the design decision involved a tradeoff. In any case, it doesn't seem to
me that that design decision necessarily implies that calling super with a
nil self
Thanks, all.
Quincey, the three Error Points you defined are great. Fortunately, in this
case I have the easy one…
On 2011 May 29, at 13:03, Quincey Morris wrote:
Error point #2 (super returns nil) is easy. Just return nil.
because one should assume that the superclass will have cleaned up
