On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Seth Willits <sli...@araelium.com> wrote: > I know this isn't exactly a very detailed description, but if they were > equivalent, then changing [self class] to self shouldn't have fixed it, but > it did. Pretty weird.
Does not follow. It's quite common in C-based languages to have broken code which only manifests bugs in a certain machine context. (For example, reading from unintialized memory.) Code which is logically equivalent will not necessarily generate the same machine code, thus you can have two pieces of logically equivalent code but only have one of them set you up for a crash due to a bug elsewhere. Mike _______________________________________________ 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: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
