On Jul 14, 2014, at 3:44 AM, Uli Kusterer <witness.of.teacht...@gmx.net> wrote:
> NSNumber is more complicated to use (constant calls to integerValue and > valueWithInteger: etc. to actually work with them) and carries a bit more > overhead (it creates a new NSObject subclass on the heap every time “Every time" hasn’t been true for years (since 10.7?) NSNumbers representing “small enough” integers are represented as tagged pointers and don’t cause any heap allocation at all. The exact meaning of “small enough” is an implementation detail (and differs greatly between 32-bit and 64-bit) but in practice, integers up to ±1000 should be cheap, I believe. But I agree about NSNumbers being more complicated. The only time you need to use an NSNumber is if you want to stick a number into a collection or otherwise need to treat it as an object. —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
