Re: Why is [nil aMessage] a no-op?

FROM : Adam P Jenkins
DATE : Fri Apr 18 15:56:38 2008

On Apr 18, 2008, at 1:16 AM, Graham Cox wrote:
>
> Here's a simple example:
>
> - (void) dealloc
> {
>    [someIvar release];
>    [super dealloc];
> }
>
>
>
> is <someIvar> really initialised? Maybe it's nil? Do I care at this 
> point? no - either way, the code is correct - if the object was 
> made, it's released, if it wasn't, it's a no-op. Exactly what you 
> want.


That makes a lot of sense.  I can now picture many lines of code I've 
written over the years which wouldn't have been necessary with this 
feature.

Thanks a lot to everyone who responded to my question.  I now 
understand the pros and cons of the nil-eats-messages feature much 
better, and it doesn't seem like a mis-feature to me now.

Adam