本文介绍了为什么我更喜欢unsafe_unretained限定符而不是赋值给弱引用属性?的处理方法,对大家解决问题具有一定的参考价值,需要的朋友们下面随着小编来一起学习吧!

问题描述

两者有什么区别?

@property(unsafe_unretained) MyClass *delegate;
@property(assign) MyClass *delegate;

两者都是非归零弱引用,对吧?那么有什么理由我应该写更长更难阅读 unsafe_unretained 而不是 assign

Both are non-zeroing weak references, right? So is there any reason why I should write the longer and harder to read unsafe_unretained instead of assign?

注意:我知道这是一个归零参考。但它只有iOS> = 5.

Note: I know there is weak which is a zeroing reference. But it's only iOS >= 5.

推荐答案

在属性访问器中,是的,它们是相同的。对于这种情况, assign 属性将映射到 unsafe_unretained 。但是考虑手动编写ivar而不是使用ivar合成。

In a property accessor, yes those are the same. assign properties will map to unsafe_unretained for this case. But consider writing the ivar manually rather than using ivar synthesis.

@interface Foo
{
   Bar *test;
}
@property(assign) Bar *test;
@end

这个代码现在在ARC下是不正确的,而在ARC之前它是'吨。所有Obj-C对象的默认属性是 __ strong 向前移动。推进这项工作的正确方法如下:

This code is now incorrect under ARC, whereas prior to ARC it wasn't. The default attribute for all Obj-C objects is __strong moving forward. The proper way to do this moving forward is as follows.

@interface Foo
{
   __unsafe_unretained Bar *test;
}
@property(unsafe_unretained) Bar *test;
@end

或使用ivar合成只需 @property(unsafe_unretained )Bar * test

or with ivar synthesis just @property(unsafe_unretained) Bar *test

所以它真的只是一种不同的写作方式,但它表现出不同的意图。

So really its just a different way of writing the same thing, but it shows a different intent.

这篇关于为什么我更喜欢unsafe_unretained限定符而不是赋值给弱引用属性?的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持!

09-24 18:53