Smart pointers instead of GC?

[Manu]

On 4 February 2014 14:19, Michel Fortin <michel.fortin at michelf.ca> wrote:

> On 2014-02-04 03:45:33 +0000, Manu <turkeyman at gmail.com> said:
>
>  The majority of trivial allocations don't produce cycles; closures,
>> strings, temporary arrays and working sets.
>>
>
> Oh, no. Beware of closures. That's a frequent problem in Objective-C ARC,
> even for those who understand ARC well. You have to be very careful of
> closures creating cycles if you use them as callbacks. For instance, you
> have a view that has a pointer to the model and sets a callback for the
> model to call when something change to update the view; that's a cycle and
> you need to use a weak ref to the view within the closure. Pretty common
> pattern.


Ah right. Interesting.
It sounds like this could be addressed easily though by the API that
manages the 'event' handler. If you use a raw delegate, maybe it's a
problem, but it sounds like an event-programming construct, and that
usually requires an event class that can handle multiple subscribers, as
soon as that exists, it's easy to hide the weak reference behind the event
api...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20140204/01979ac6/attachment.html>