1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
|
Refcounting
-----------
INTRODUCTION
Many objects in Inkscape have lifecycles which are managed by
"reference counting". Each such object has a counter associated with it,
which is supposed to reflect the number of outstanding references to it.
When that counter falls to zero, the object can be freed.
This releases the programmer from worrying about having freed an object
while somebody else is still using it (or someone else freeing while
you're using it!). Simply "ref" the object (increment the counter) to
stake your claim, and then "unref" it (decrement the counter) when you don't
need it anymore. The ultimate decision to free the object is made safely
behind the scenes.
You should "ref" an object whenever you plan to hold onto it while
transferring control to another part of the code (which might otherwise
end up freeing the object out from under you).
REFCOUNTING FUNCTIONS
Ref and unref functions are provided to manipulate an object's refcount
(and perhaps make the final decision to free the object), but their names
will vary depending on the type of object.
Examples include g_object_ref()/g_object_unref() (for most GObject-based
types), sp_object_ref()/sp_object_unref() (for SPObject-derived classes),
and GC::anchor()/GC::release (for garbage-collector managed objects deriving
from GC::Anchored -- more on that later).
[ note: for code underneath the Inkscape namespace, you need only write
GC::anchor(), but in other code you will need to write
Inkscape::GC::anchor(), or import the GC namespace to your .cpp file
with:
namespace GC = Inkscape::GC;
Consider this encouragement to start writing new code in the Inkscape
namespace. ]
REFCOUNTING POLICY
Refcounted objects start with a reference count of one when they are
created. This means that you do not need to manually ref one that you've
just created. However, you will still be responsible for unreffing it when
you're done with it.
This means that during the lifetime of an object, there should be N refs
and N+1 unrefs on it. If these become unbalanced, then you are likely to
experience either transient crashing bugs (the object gets freed while
someone is still using it) or memory leaks (the object never gets freed).
As a rule, an object should be unreffed by the same class or compilation
unit that reffed it. Reffing or unreffing an object on someone else's behalf
is usually a recipe for confusion (and defeats the point of refcounting,
really). If you pass someone a pointer, they should be the ones responsible
for reffing it if they need to hold onto it. Similarly, you shouldn't try to
make the decision to unref it for them.
When you've unreffed the last ref you know about, you should generally
assume that the object is now gone forever.
CIRCULAR REFERENCES
One disadvantage of reference counting is that a naive application of it
breaks down in the presence of objects that reference each other. Common
examples are elements in a doubly-linked list with "prev" and "next"
pointers, and nodes in a tree, where a parent keeps a list of children, and
children keep a pointer to their parent. If both cases, if there is a "ref"
in both directions, neither object can ever get freed.
Because of this, circular data structures should be avoided when possible.
When they are necessary, try only "reffing" in one direction
(e.g. parent -> child) but not the other (e.g. child -> parent).
This can sometimes be trickier than it sounds -- circular references don't
have to be direct to cause problems. A simple example of an indirect circular
reference would be a circular singly-linked list, where the "last" element
in the list points back to the "first". In that case, unidirectional
reffing isn't sufficient; you'd have no choice but to delegate ref handling to
some object which encapsuled the circular list, reffing and unreffing entries
as it added and removed them.
ANCHORED OBJECTS
As a rule of thumb, the garbage collector can see pointers in:
* global/static variables in the program
* local variables/parameters
* objects derived from GC::Managed<>
* STL containers using GC::Alloc<>
* objects manually allocated with GC::SCANNED
It cannot see pointers in:
* global/static variables in shared libraries
* objects not derived from GC::Managed<>
* STL containers not using GC::Alloc<>
Since a lot of important objects (e.g. gtkmm widgets or Glib collections)
fall into the latter category, I've provided the GC::Anchored class from
which garbage-collector managed classes can be derived if they may be
remembered in such places. As noted earlier, the associated ref and unref
functions are GC::anchor() and GC::release(), respectively.
For most refcounted objects, a nonzero refcount means "this object is in
use", and a zero refcount means "this object is no longer in use, you can
free it now". For GC::Anchored objects, refcounting is merely an override
to the normal operation of the garbage collector, so the rules are relaxed
somewhat: a nonzero refcount merely means "the object is in use in places that
the garbage collector can't see", and a zero refcount asserts that "the garbage
collector can now see every use that matters".
While GC::Anchored objects start with an initial refcount of one like
any other refcounted type, in most cases it's safe (and convenient) to
GC::release the object immediately upon creating it. This is because the
garbage collector can see references to the object from parameters or local
variables. Trust the collector.
One final note: when code is converted from pure refcounting to garbage
collection with GC::Anchored, refs and unrefs between GC::Anchored objects
should be removed. Refs are no longer necessary, and when circular references
are present, reffing will lead to memory leaks.
Normally (unlike pure refcounting) the collector has no problem with freeing
circular references, but GC::anchor()ing a reference the collector can
already see overrides the collector's judgement.
|
