Suppose I have a class (non-ARC environment):
@interface SomeObject : NSObject {
UILabel *someLabel;
dispatch_queue_t queue;
}
- (void)doAsyncStuff;
- (void)doAnimation;
@end
@implementation SomeObject
- (id)init {
self = [super init];
if (self) {
someLabel = [[UILabel alloc] init];
someLabel.text = @"Just inited";
queue = dispatch_queue_create("com.me.myqueue", DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL);
}
return self;
}
- (void)doAsyncStuff {
dispatch_async(queue, ^{
...
// Do some stuff on the current thread, might take a while
...
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
someLabel.text = [text stringByAppendingString:@" in block"];
[self doAnimation];
}
}
}
- (void)doAnimation {
...
// Does some animation in the UI
...
}
- (void)dealloc {
if (queue) {
dispatch_release(queue);
}
[someLabel release];
[super dealloc];
}
If my block gets kicked off and then everything else holding a reference to the instance of this object releases it, am I guaranteed that dealloc won't be called because the nested block refers to an instance variable (and to self) -- that dealloc will happen after the nested block exits? My understanding is that my block has a strong reference to self, so this should be kosher.
This is fine, for the reasons you've stated.
The important thing to note is that you would create a retain cycle, if the class (represented by self
) retained the block in any way. Because you're defining it in-line, and passing it to dispatch_async
, you should be ok.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With