Sending removeFromSuperview to self didn't release itself in my scenario

Question

I have a parent UIView and an UITextView as one of the subviews. And I created a button to dismiss the parent UIView like this:

-(void)cancelButtonPressed:(UIButton *)sender
{
    [UIView animateWithDuration:0.2 delay:0.0 options:UIViewAnimationOptionCurveEaseInOut animations:^{
    self.frame = CGRectZero;
    } completion:^(BOOL finished) {
        if (finished) {
            [self removeFromSuperview];
        }
    }];
}

I can tell that the parent UIView didn't get released because if I typed some text into the UITextView and dismissed it, when I opened the UIView again, instead of a blank UITextView, the SAME text is in it again.

I checked the Leaks tool but I didn't see any leaking. So I'm guessing if I have some kind of retain cycle or what.

UPDATE:I have another object (which is the AppDelegate) who is holding the UIView's instance: _myView as a global variable like this:

_myView = [[MyView alloc] init];

_myView.nameLabel.text = _user.screen_name;
[_window addSubview:_myView];

[UIView animateWithDuration:0.2 delay:0.0 options:UIViewAnimationOptionCurveEaseInOut animations:^{
    _myView.frame = CGRectZero;
} completion:nil];

But in order to avoid retain cycle, should I create a weak self like this: __weak MyView *weakSelf and in the animation block do this: [weakSelf removeFromSuperview]?

How do you create the parent view? May be you create it ones and store a strong reference to it? — Andrew Romanov, Aug 31 '15 at 04:14
Please show the code where you add and handle the `UIView `. — tuledev, Aug 31 '15 at 04:23
You probably have some strong pointer in the self object which is retaining itself. — Saheb Roy, Aug 31 '15 at 04:49
Thanks guys, I just found that there is another view having a strong pointer to it so it won't get released during app life cycle. Now I have fixed it. — bolizhou, Aug 31 '15 at 05:10

Sheamus · Accepted Answer · 2015-08-31T05:46:22.377

I've also tried calling removeFromSuperview on the view itself, and it doesn't result in the view being released.

If you want to release the view, then go with an approach that uses a delegate. That way, you will be able to call removeFromSuperview on the view, once the animation is complete, and set it to nil. This has worked for me in the past.

So, you can add a method to the view class that you want to animate closed, where you will do the animation. Set your view controller as a delegate to your view, and call some method on the delegate, from the completion block of that animation.

You can create your own protocol for this. If you keep it general enough, and focus only on animation callbacks, you can reuse the protocol in all your view controllers.

I see what your idea is. Basically you need to set it to nil somewhere even you removed it from super view. Thanks. — bolizhou, Sep 07 '15 at 07:50

score 0 · Answer 2 · answered Sep 01 '15 at 08:49

Memory management and logic are independent things. A memory leak will never change the behavior of your program. Behavior like displaying something is controlled by what you tell it to display. If it displays the same thing as before, then you must be giving it the same thing to display somehow. Even if you somehow leaked the original thing, if you pass a new thing for it to display, it will display that thing. So look at your logic. Memory management has nothing to do with what you're seeing.

Thanks, I will look into the memory management more carefully. — bolizhou, Sep 07 '15 at 07:49

Sending removeFromSuperview to self didn't release itself in my scenario

2 Answers2