Why and when do we need to use @autoreleasepool in ios projects I have read so many blogs for @autorelease pool but I am still not clear about this @autorelease pool concept in objective c or ios development.  So can any one please throw a light on this concept. It would be very helpful to me if any one could provide me with an example of it and when the use of @autorelease pool is required.   How can I measure the memory allocation with use of @autorelease pool and without it.  Please throw a light on this topic might be it is duplicate.
How does the NSAutoreleasePool autorelease pool work? As I understand it, anything created with an alloc, new, or copy needs to be manually released. For example:  int main(void) {     NSString *string;     string = [[NSString alloc] init];     /* use the string */     [string release]; }   My question, though, is wouldn't this be just as valid?:  int main(void) {     NSAutoreleasePool *pool;     pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];     NSString *string;     string = [[[NSString alloc] init] autorelease];     /* use the string */     [pool drain]; }
Importing shapefile into AutoCAD Map 3D? I'm trying to import shapefiles into a DWG using diferent layers names and during my web search I found this post. I know you did this 2 years ago but my problem is very similar and I wonder if you could help me.  Basically I've got a shapefiles of pipelines and I want to use the attribute name to sort the features into different CAD levels in teh same layer. I tried the import and although soem people say that "you can set the import to use data field" I can't see any option to do it and I'm really struggling. Any help appreciated.  I'm running on AutoCAD Map 3D 2010. Is there a fast way to get to the bottom of the Death Star? In Tiny Death Star, you can get to the top of your tower by tapping on the top of the screen while avoiding the "Add Level" button. However, the only way I can find to go to the bottom of the tower is to wait for someone to want an elevator ride, and tap on the button to give them that ride. Is there any other hot-spot for getting to the bottom of your Death Star? I am doing some homework exercises and stumbled upon this question. I don't know where to start.      Prove that the union of countably many countable sets is countable.   Just reading it confuses me.   Any hints or help is greatly appreciated! Cheers! Rotation and Scale have suddenly stopped working? I was working quickly, (making mistakes), and suddenly rotation and scale transforms stopped working. I think I hit some shortcut or button by accident. Translate still works though. I checked that the transforms weren't locked and such, to no avail. What could be the cause? Predicator vs. Predicate BACKGROUND According to Oxford Dictionaries Online:   means &quot;(In systemic grammar) a verb phrase considered as a constituent of clause structure, along with subject, object, and adjunct.&quot;  means &quot;The part of a sentence or clause containing a verb and stating something about the subject (e.g. went home in John went home).&quot;  In the latter example of John went home, it seems, the predicate is went home whereas the predicator is went, home being an adjunct and thus not part of the predicator as defined. Now, I looked further in  to better understand the difference. The article recognizes two competing notions of the predicate in theories of grammar:  (1) Predicates in traditional grammar (e.g., went home in John went home) (2) Predicates in modern theories of syntax and grammar (e.g., went in John went home)  Which, according to the article, causes confusion as to what exactly the term predicate mean, and some grammarians came up with a new term &quot;predicator&quot; specifically for use (2), says the article. No problem thus far. What bothers me: The article in its explanation of (2) says, &quot;Other function words -- e.g. auxiliary verbs, certain prepositions, phrasal particles, etc. -- are viewed as part of the predicate.&quot; (Emphasis mine.) Now, remember this definition of the predicate, i.e., (2) above, corresponds to the new term &quot;predicator&quot;. I understand that auxiliary verbs are part of this definition of predicate, because an auxiliary verb can be part of a verb cluster. But can certain prepositions and phrasal particles also? The article has these example sentences (Words belonging to &quot;predicate&quot; (2) are boldfaced as in the article itself; My comments in parentheses.):  The butter is in the drawer. (preposition in being part of the predicate) You should give it up. (particle up being part of the predicate) Susan is pulling your leg. (I don't know why leg is marked as part of the predicate. Maybe a typo?)  QUESTION Except for the last one, which I suspect is a typo, I'd like to know whether the preposition in and the particle up belong to the predicate as presented in (2) and thus belong to the new term &quot;predicator&quot;. What is the name of this theorem, and are there any caveats? For random variable $X$ that follows some distribution, $f(x)$ is the probability density function of that distribution if and only if $$\mathbb{E}[\phi(X)] = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \phi(x) f(x)dx$$ for all functions $\phi$.  Context: My professor used this in lecture to demonstrate a way to find the distribution of $cX$ given random variable $X$ that follows a specific distribution.   What is the name of this theorem? Have I missed any qualifications/caveats? I am in particular curious about whether "for all functions" is correct. My professor mentioned "positive, bounded, deterministic functions," but I am not sure what he meant by that. Where can I find a proof of this theorem? Forbid links to open new tabs in Google Chrome I'm looking into the technique of 'hanging' meat, and whether there are 'home' applications that would be safe and have a beneficial effect.  Now, there are a lot of (possible) synonyms that muddle the waters (for me). There's hanging, dry-aging, faisandage (for game birds), and more. What I'm looking for is the 1-3 day (near) room-temperature storage of meat and the spoiling / enzyme process that will cause a flavor change. Feel free to help me along by clarifying the answer.  Basically:   Is there any (good) use for this technique / process for supermarket / butcher cuts of meat? What should be taken in consideration for safe execution? $|p(z)| \leq M$ for $|z| \leq 1$ Show that $|p(z)| \leq M|z|^n$ for $|z| \geq 1$ How do I disable 'Activities' hot corner in GNOME shell? GNOME shell has the so-called feature "hot corner", that opens the dashboard  if the mouse touches the top-left corner of a monitor screen.  I want this disabled I used to have a GNOME shell extension, yet the repository is not found anymore:  git clone git@github.com/Ahrak/gnome-shell-extension-disable-hot-corners.git fatal: repository 'git@github.com/Ahrak/gnome-shell-extension-disable-hot-corners.git' does not exist I have a little problem with the placement of my picture. I want to insert it at the end of the introduction chapter but its place is not where I want.   I think the problem become from the:  \begin{figure} ... \end{figure}   Because when I insert the picture without using \begin{figure}... the picture is at the end of the chapter as I want.   Look the picture below. How to manually parse a floating point number from a string Whenever I try to get somebody to follow me in Skyrim they something in the lives with "You already have a follower.". The problem is, I don't.   I have not, to my recollection, had a follower at any given point in the game.  The only thing I can think of is that I have (spoiler)      finished Anriel's Endeavors and gotten him as a summon creature.    Or do I have a hidden follower that I can't remember. A dog or a horse perhaps? Note that I do not have a dog or horse following me now. I talked to dog once, and had a horse that died.  Is this a common/known issue? Is there a work around?  Any tips? My wife wants a 4th baby, but I don't My wife wants a 4th baby, but I don't.  We have been talking about it for the last few days (talking strongly).   I have raised points such as:   We will get less time to spend with our current kids. The age gap between the first and the last will be too wide. It will cost more money. She will be out of work longer. We will need a bigger house. And we don't even have our own house yet (we are still renting). We will have to start again. Sleepless nights, nappies, feeding, new cot, car seat, etc etc.   She says:   She feels like she is missing something. She has always wanted a large family. Things will be the same regardless of having 3, or 4 kids. She agrees that money will be tighter, but wants to push through it.   Our current kids are 9 months, 2 years, and 4 years. We are young married couple (25), and I have a fairly decent job.  What would be the pros and cons of having another child?   How can we rationally talk to the other about having/or not having another child?  And what should we do if we cannot agree? How to select lines between two marker patterns which may occur multiple times with awk/sed I'm listing some items for sale online, and have taken a bunch of pictures with my iPhone.  About half-way through the process, iPhoto '11 stopped downloading new photos into its local Photo Stream.  I've quit iPhoto and re-opened it.  I've gone into the Photos app on my iPhone and confirmed all the pictures are there.   Is this normal behavior? Is there any way to tell iPhoto to download my pictures? Undergraduate classical mechanics introduces both Lagrangians and Hamiltonians, while undergrad quantum mechanics seems to only use the Hamiltonian. But particle physics, and more generally quantum field theory seem to only use the Lagrangian, e.g. you hear about the Klein-Gordon Lagrangian, Dirac Lagrangian, Standard Model Lagrangian and so on. Why is there a mismatch here? Why does it seem like only Hamiltonians are used in undergraduate quantum mechanics, but only Lagrangians are used in quantum field theory? Bernoulli numbers, taylor series expansion of tan x I found the following formula here: .  Taylor series of $\tan x$:  $$\tan x = \sum_{n\,=\,1}^\infty \frac {(-1)^{n-1}2^{2n} (2^{2n}-1) B_{2n}} {(2n)!} x^{2n - 1} $$.  I do not understand what the Bernoulli number means in this formula. My problems are the following ones:  I do not know anything about Bernoulli numbers. I do not know how to expand the Bernoulli number in the formula you see further up. What expansion will be the final result? How did you arrive there? Why did you arrive there? How did you know that you should use the specific Bernoulli-related terms that you used in your answer? What is the purpose of the Bernoulli number in this formula?  A great deal of thanks. how to run a winform from console application? How do I create, execute and control a winform from within a console application? find command with regex quantifier e.g. {1,2} I have been trying to create a find command string that will find all files that end with a number 1-99 but exclude all others.  e.g. I want to find myfile1 myfile99 but not myfile456 and not myfilebackup  The regex I'm thinking of is myfile[1-9]{1,2} but I can't get this to work with find.  find . -regex '.*myfile[0-9]{1,2}' OR  find . -iname 'myfile[0-9]{1,2}'  From what I can see it's the {1,2} part that is not working.  (by the way can you use -name -regex interchangably?)  Any help appreciated.