Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ASTextKitComponents needs to be deallocated on main #598

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 4, 2017

Conversation

maicki
Copy link
Contributor

@maicki maicki commented Oct 1, 2017

Certain objects need to be deallocated on main. We have an automatic mechanism were it goes through each ivar and checks if the object needs to be deallocated on main or not. We have to add ASTextKitComponents to this list of classes now.

There are multiple ways to tackle this issue, this PR just adds the class right into the method that checks for classes who should be deallocated on main. It will have the problem as we check it with a string comparison if we change the name of the ASTextKitComponents we could miss this change in here as well as if we would like to add new classes this can easily hard to maintain.

I will follow up with a PR that is more flexible approach, but it will add some overhead.

Adresses #586

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 1, 2017

🚫 CI failed with log

@maicki maicki force-pushed the MSDeallocTextKitComponentsMainSimple branch from f4991d7 to 4718b9a Compare October 1, 2017 14:54
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 1, 2017

🚫 CI failed with log

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 1, 2017

1 Warning
⚠️ Any source code changes should have an entry in CHANGELOG.md or have #trivial in their title.

Generated by 🚫 Danger

Copy link
Member

@appleguy appleguy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IMO, this is the best solution to go with right now. We can ship out this release because it also includes the important fix for a default size for the PINDiskCache... (previous releases had unlimited size!).

Then we can discuss the other PR a bit more and see if any ideas to improve come up?

Copy link
Member

@nguyenhuy nguyenhuy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! Landing this should buy us some time to explore a better/more scalable solution.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants