FROM : Brady Duga
DATE : Mon Mar 10 21:34:06 2008
On Mar 10, 2008, at 1:21 PM, Gary L. Wade wrote:
> If all the code you're using is present, it looks to me like you're
> not releasing the object pointed at by image; the object returned by
> imageWithData is not an auto-released object.
It's not? Why not? I thought convenience methods like that did not
transfer ownership to the caller. Isn't the convention that the method
should say alloc, new or copy to signify the granting of ownership?
--Brady
DATE : Mon Mar 10 21:34:06 2008
On Mar 10, 2008, at 1:21 PM, Gary L. Wade wrote:
> If all the code you're using is present, it looks to me like you're
> not releasing the object pointed at by image; the object returned by
> imageWithData is not an auto-released object.
It's not? Why not? I thought convenience methods like that did not
transfer ownership to the caller. Isn't the convention that the method
should say alloc, new or copy to signify the granting of ownership?
--Brady
| Related mails | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| slasktrattenator | Mar 10, 17:33 | |
| slasktrattenator | Mar 10, 21:03 | |
| Gary L. Wade | Mar 10, 21:21 | |
| Brady Duga | Mar 10, 21:34 | |
| slasktrattenator | Mar 10, 21:58 | |
| Gorazd Krosl | Mar 10, 22:02 | |
| Rob Keniger | Mar 11, 04:46 | |
| slasktrattenator | Mar 11, 11:53 |






Cocoa mail archive

