didReceiveMemoryWarning

  • didReceiveMemoryWarning practices

As you said, the controller's default implementation of didReceiveMemoryWarning releases its view if it is 'safe to do so'. While it's not clear from Apple's documents what 'safe to do so' means, it is generally recognized as it has no superview (thus there is no way that the view is currently visible), and itsloadView method can rebuild the entire view without problems.

The best practice when you override didReceiveMemoryWarning is, not to try releasing any view objects at all. Just release your custom data, if it is no longer necessary. Regarding views, just let the superclass's implementation deal with them.

Sometimes, however, the necessity of the data may depend on the state of your view. In most cases, those custom data is set in viewDidLoad method. In these cases, 'safe to release custom data' means that you know that loadView and viewDidLoad will be invoked before the view controller uses the custom data again.

Therefore, in your didReceiveMemoryWarning, call the superclass implementation first, and if its view is unloaded, then release the custom data because you know that loadView and viewDidLoad will be invoked again for sure. For example,

-(void)didReceiveMemoryWarning {
   
/* This is the view controller's method */
   
[super didReceiveMemoryWarning];
   
if(![self isViewLoaded]){
       
/* release your custom data which will be rebuilt in loadView or viewDidLoad */
   
}
}

Be careful not to use self.view == nil, because self.view assumes that the view is needed for someone and will immediately load the view again.

  • viewDidUnload method

viewDidUnload is called when the view controller unloaded the view due to a memory warning. For example, if you remove the view from the superview and set the view property of the controller tonilviewDidUnload method will not be invoked. A subtle point is that even if the view of a view controller is already released and set to nil by the time the controller receivesdidReceiveMemoryWarning, so actually there is no view to unload for the controller,viewDidUnload will be invoked if you call the superclass's implementation ofdidReceiveMemoryWarning.

That's why it's not a good practice to manually set the view property of a view controller to nil. If you do, you may better send a viewDidUnload message as well. I guess your understanding ofviewDidUnload is more desirable, but apparently it's not the current behavior.

  • Popping view controllers

If you mean 'removing from the superview' by 'popping', it does decrease the retain count of the view, but not necessarily deallocate it.

If you mean popping out from a UINavigationController, it actually decrease the retain count of the view controller itself. If the view controller is not retained by another object, it will be deallocated, desirably with its view. As I explained, viewDidUnload will not be invoked this time.

  • Others...

Technically, the retain count may not go down to zero. The object is more likely to be just deallocated without setting the count to zero beforehand.

Just to make sure, the view controller itself is normally not deallocated by default behaviors due to the memory warning.

  • 0
    点赞
  • 0
    收藏
    觉得还不错? 一键收藏
  • 0
    评论

“相关推荐”对你有帮助么?

  • 非常没帮助
  • 没帮助
  • 一般
  • 有帮助
  • 非常有帮助
提交
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值