> On Nov 10, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Alex Zavatone <z...@mac.com> wrote: > > Here's a great reason to use objectForKey: wherever possible instead of > valueForKey: - valueForKey: with an unknown key will throw > NSUnknownKeyException saying "this class is not key value coding-compliant > for the key ".
Yes, but that’s a non-issue with NSDictionary because there are no unknown keys. It handle any key (that doesn’t start with an @) by looking it up in the dictionary. I’m not saying you should use -valueForKey, just that you need to be clear on its behavior on _arbitrary_ objects vs. its behavior with NSDictionary. > But if we remove the @ (obviously unintended), valueForKey causes an > EXC_BAD_ACCES while objectForKey reports "error: string literal must be > prefixed by '@'". Um … you’re doing that in lldb? The difference there seems like an lldb bug. It shouldn’t be allowing you to pass a C string literal as an id, no matter what method is being called. > And David does state that whether an exception is thrown or not is > implementation dependent. Yes, the implementation OF THE CLASS BEING CALLED. Which is NSDictionary. Which, as we keep saying, handles any key by looking it up in the dictionary. —Jens _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
