Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 4, 2017, at 11:35 AM, Charles Srstka via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > >> On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:09 AM, David Hart via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >> >> I encountered this precise memory leak in my code a few days ago, so I >> sympathize. A second solution would be to drop function references. I think >> a core team member suggested it on another thread. > > If I had to guess, I’d surmise that it's probably the single most common > memory leak in Swift and modern Objective-C code. What I wish is that it were > possible to get rid of implicit captures altogether—instead of just inserting > [weak self] when you *don’t* want to capture something strongly, also require > [strong self] when you do. Referencing self otherwise causes an error. We’d > never get away with it now, though, with the source compatibility promise in > place. Have you seen my guarded closures proposal? I'm planning to update that to incorporate some additional ideas as soon as I have time. I'm hoping I can get to this soon and have it reviews for Swift 4. I think it would help address this problem without breaking compatibility. > > Charles > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
