How to copy an object in Objective-C

Question

I need to deep copy a custom object that has objects of its own. I've been reading around and am a bit confused as to how to inherit NSCopying and how to use NSCopyObject.

Answer 1

As always with reference types, there are two notions of "copy". I'm sure you know them, but for completeness.

1. A bitwise copy. In this, we just copy the memory bit for bit - this is what NSCopyObject does. Nearly always, it's not what you want. Objects have internal state, other objects, etc, and often make assumptions that they're the only ones holding references to that data. Bitwise copies break this assumption.
2. A deep, logical copy. In this, we make a copy of the object, but without actually doing it bit by bit - we want an object that behaves the same for all intents and purposes, but isn't (necessarily) a memory-identical clone of the original - the Objective C manual calls such an object "functionally independent" from it's original. Because the mechanisms for making these "intelligent" copies varies from class to class, we ask the objects themselves to perform them. This is the NSCopying protocol.

You want the latter. If this is one of your own objects, you need simply adopt the protocol NSCopying and implement -(id)copyWithZone:(NSZone *)zone. You're free to do whatever you want; though the idea is you make a real copy of yourself and return it. You call copyWithZone on all your fields, to make a deep copy. A simple example is

@interface YourClass : NSObject <NSCopying> 
{
   SomeOtherObject *obj;
}

// In the implementation
-(id)copyWithZone:(NSZone *)zone
{
  // We'll ignore the zone for now
  YourClass *another = [[YourClass alloc] init];
  another.obj = [obj copyWithZone: zone];

  return another;
}

Answer 2

Apple documentation says

A subclass version of the copyWithZone: method should send the message to super first, to incorporate its implementation, unless the subclass descends directly from NSObject.

to add to the existing answer

@interface YourClass : NSObject <NSCopying> 
{
   SomeOtherObject *obj;
}

// In the implementation
-(id)copyWithZone:(NSZone *)zone
{
  YourClass *another = [super copyWithZone:zone];
  another.obj = [obj copyWithZone: zone];

  return another;
}

Answer 3

I don't know the difference between that code and mine, but I have problems with that solution, so I read a little bit more and found that we have to set the object before return it. I mean something like:

#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>

@interface YourObject : NSObject <NSCopying>

@property (strong, nonatomic) NSString *name;
@property (strong, nonatomic) NSString *line;
@property (strong, nonatomic) NSMutableString *tags;
@property (strong, nonatomic) NSString *htmlSource;
@property (strong, nonatomic) NSMutableString *obj;

-(id) copyWithZone: (NSZone *) zone;

@end


@implementation YourObject


-(id) copyWithZone: (NSZone *) zone
{
    YourObject *copy = [[YourObject allocWithZone: zone] init];

    [copy setNombre: self.name];
    [copy setLinea: self.line];
    [copy setTags: self.tags];
    [copy setHtmlSource: self.htmlSource];

    return copy;
}

I added this answer because I have a lot of problems with this issue and I have no clue about why is it happening. I don't know the difference, but it's working for me and maybe it can be useful for others too : )

Answer 4

another.obj = [obj copyWithZone: zone];

I think, that this line causes memory leak, because you access to obj through property which is (I assume) declared as retain. So, retain count will be increased by property and copyWithZone.

I believe it should be:

another.obj = [[obj copyWithZone: zone] autorelease];

or:

SomeOtherObject *temp = [obj copyWithZone: zone];
another.obj = temp;
[temp release]; 

Answer 5

There is also the use of the -> operator for copying. For Example:

-(id)copyWithZone:(NSZone*)zone
{
    MYClass* copy = [MYClass new];
    copy->_property1 = self->_property1;
    ...
    copy->_propertyN = self->_propertyN;
    return copy;
}

The reasoning here is the resulting copied object should reflect the state of the original object. The "." operator could introduce side effects as this one calls getters which in turn may contain logic.

Answer 6

This is probably unpopular way. But here how I do it:

object1 = // object to copy

YourClass *object2 = [[YourClass alloc] init];
object2.property1 = object1.property1;
object2.property2 = object1.property2;
..
etc.

Quite simple and straight forward. :P