On Jul 7, 2011, at 5:25 PM, Jens Alfke wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:25 PM, Greg Parker wrote:
>> This is less safe than you might like. On iOS and 64-bit Mac, you may end up
>> with both copies of the class in use simultaneously. That means two separate
>> invocations of +initialize, two separat
On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:25 PM, Greg Parker wrote:
> This is less safe than you might like. On iOS and 64-bit Mac, you may end up
> with both copies of the class in use simultaneously. That means two separate
> invocations of +initialize, two separate locks for @synchronized([MyClass
> class]), et
On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Jens Alfke wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Kenny Leung wrote:
>> Class X is implemented in both and . One of
>> the two will be used. Which one is undefined.
>> The same happens with dynamically loaded bundles, etc...
>> Is there any good way around this?
>
>
On Jul 7, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Kenny Leung wrote:
> Class X is implemented in both and . One of
> the two will be used. Which one is undefined.
> The same happens with dynamically loaded bundles, etc...
> Is there any good way around this?
Not putting the classes into a static library. If you
Hi All.
Hopefully somebody can help me with this:
I have a static library with utilities that I like to use everywhere (it's a
static library because we use it on iPhone as well).
So I link it in with a framwork that I'm writing, and also link it in with an
application that uses that framework
