I would like to do the following:
In a class (shared instance) I will have a method that takes as parameters a data object (nsstring) and a delegate. This will create a new background thread and dispatch some calculations on that thread. The thing is that the method may be called hundreds of times with different data and possibly different delegates passed in . I would like the results to go to the correct delegate (I will need to keep the delegates in an array right? or can I just pass them to the background thread as they come and when that thread finishes it will send the result only to that delegate?).
One more thing... all this methods will use a very large data structure (an array with 10000 nsstring objects,they only need to read from it). How do I make sure this is not duplicated on each thread? And is only allocated when needed and deallocated when no thread uses it?
Here is the code I decided to use:
if (!self.dictPasswords) {
// read everything from text
NSString* fileContents = [NSString stringWithContentsOfFile:fileRoot
encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding error:nil];
// separate by new line
self.dictPasswords = [fileContents componentsSeparatedByCharactersInSet:
[NSCharacterSet newlineCharacterSet]];
}
__weak id<PSPasswordDictionaryVerificationDelegate> wdelegate = delegate;
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(0, 0), ^{
[wdelegate willBeginPasswordVerificationForPassword:password];
for (NSString *posiblePass in self.dictPasswords) {
if ([password isEqualToString:posiblePass]) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[wdelegate password:password isInDictionary:YES];
});
return;
}
}
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[wdelegate password:password isInDictionary:NO];
});
});
However... after this runs I get a permanent 24MB added to the used memory. I would like to detect when no threads are using the self.DIctPasswords array and deallocate it. It will be read from the file again later if somebody calls this method again...
Thanks for the help guys.
Just let the block capture the delegate.
No need to hold it otherwise
Class
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#protocol ProcessorDelegate;
#interface Processor
- (void)process:(id)data forDelegate:(id<ProcessorDelegate>)delegate;
+ (Processor*)sharedInstance;
#end
#protocol ProcessorDelegate
- (void)processor:(Processor*)processor didProcess:(id)data withResult:(id)result;
#end
#implementation Processor
- (void)process:(id)data forDelegate:(id<ProcessorDelegate>)delegate {
__weak id<ProcessorDelegate> wdelegate = delegate; //capture weak to counter potential cycles
__weak id wself = self;
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(0,0), ^{
NSLog(#"WORK");
id result = data; //TODO
[wdelegate processor:wself didProcess:data withResult:result];
});
}
+ (Processor*)sharedInstance {
static Processor *p = nil;
if(!p) {
p = [[Processor alloc] init];
}
return p;
}
#end
DEMO
#interface Demo : NSObject <ProcessorDelegate>
- (void)doIt;
#end
#implementation Demo
- (void)doIt {
[Processor sharedInstance] process:#"TEST" forDelegate:self];
}
#end
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
#autoreleasepool {
Demo *d1 = [[Demo alloc] init];
Demo *d2 = [[Demo alloc] init];
Demo *d3 = [[Demo alloc] init];
Demo *d4 = [[Demo alloc] init];
[d1 doIt];
[d2 doIt];
[d3 doIt];
[d4 doIt];
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] run];
}
}
It seems more appropriate to encapsulate the calculations plus data and delegate in a class of its own. Then you can have an array of those objects in your singleton. You may want to consider using NSOperation here.
OMT: Simply pass this large array as a pointer (to each calculation object) and use regular strong properties (not copy) if you're using any properties at all, saving a reference to it using an ivar is fine too. One concern is that this data-structure must be read-only; otherwise (when you'd modify it in each thread), you'd need some data locking.
I have done it with blocks : a singleton that have all the functions you needs (like an API) and a delegate class
// singleton.h
typedef void (^request_handler_t)(NSData* data);
- (void) foo:(NSString *)str withBlock:(request_handler_t)callback;
// singleton.m
- (void) foo:(NSString *)str withBlock:(request_handler_t)callback;{
MyDelegate *delegate = [MyDelegate delegateWithBlock:callback];
[yourMethodThatNeedDelegate:delegate];
}
// MyDelegate.h
+ (MyDelegate*) delegateWithBlock:(api_request_handler_t)block;
- (void)delegateMethod1;
//Delegate.m
+ (MyDelegate*) requestWithBlock:(api_request_handler_t)block;{
//... alloc init
_callback = block;
}
- (void)delegateMethod1;{
// delegate finished the job
block(myResultingData);
}
// Usage :
[MySingleton singleton] foo:(NSString *)str withBlock:^(NSData *data){
//do something with the async data
}];
Related
#interface ViewController ()
#property (nonatomic, strong) NSString *someString;
#end
#implementation ViewController
#synthesize someString = _someString;
- (NSString *)someString {
__block NSString *tmp;
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
tmp = _someString;
});
return tmp;
}
- (void)setSomeString:(NSString *)someString {
__block NSString *tmp;
dispatch_barrier_sync(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
tmp = someString;
});
_someString = tmp;
}
#end
some said it's better than #synchronized way because all the locking is handled down in GCD.
First off, your setter makes no sense at all, and using the default concurrent queue is also probably not what you want. Your code should probably look more like:
#interface ViewController ()
#property (nonatomic, copy) NSString *someString;
#end
#implementation ViewController
{
dispatch_queue_t _stateGuardQueue;
}
- (instancetype)init
{
if (self = [super init])
{
_stateGuardQueue = dispatch_queue_create(NULL, DISPATCH_QUEUE_CONCURRENT);
}
return self;
}
#synthesize someString = _someString;
- (NSString *)someString {
__block NSString *tmp;
dispatch_sync(_stateGuardQueue, ^{
tmp = _someString;
});
return tmp;
}
- (void)setSomeString:(NSString *)someString {
NSString* tmp = [someString copy];
dispatch_barrier_async(_stateGuardQueue, ^{
_someString = tmp;
});
}
#end
The changes I made:
Make the setter actually do the mutation inside the critical section
Use a private, per-instance concurrent queue instead of the global default concurrent queue; Submitting barrier blocks to default concurrent queues doesn't do what you think it does. (See the docs)
Change dispatch_barrier_sync to dispatch_barrier_async there's no point at all in waiting synchronously for the setter block to return, as there's no way to get a stale read on the current thread.
Change the property to have copy semantics, which is always good practice with value-semantic types (NSString, etc.) This is especially important in cases where the property might be read concurrently from multiple threads.
The thing to know is that, in isolation, this pattern provides no more "safety" than atomic properties, so you should arguably just use those (less code, etc). As to the performance question, yes, for this particular use, GCD will certainly out-perform #synchronized. For one, it allows concurrent reads, where #synchronized will serialize concurrent reads. Without testing, I would expect atomic properties to out-perform both. That said atomic properties, and protecting single operations in this way in general, are rarely an adequate concurrency strategy.
why not like below ,using async method:
- (NSString *)someString {
__block NSString *tmp;
dispatch_async(_stateGuardQueue, ^{
tmp = _someString;
});
return tmp;
}
Ok, strange thing occurred and I guess answer is quite simple, but I fail to figure out what's going on.
Situation is next:
I have an NSObject class called Constants.
Constants.h
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#import <UIKit/UIKit.h>
#import <GooglePlus/GooglePlus.h>
#interface Constants : NSObject
+(Constants*)shared;
#property GTLPlusPerson* googlePlusUser;
#property int profileType;
#property NSString *userName, *userLastName, *userEmail, *userGoogleId,*userProfilePicture;
#end
Constants.m
#import "Constants.h"
#implementation Constants
#synthesize profileType, userProfilePicture, userLastName,userName,userGoogleId,userEmail;
static Constants *constants = nil;
+ (Constants*)shared {
if (nil == constants) {
constants = [[Constants alloc] init];
}
return constants;
}
I use this class in order to save some static variables that I will use throughout the app.
Now, If I try and declare one of the variables like
[Constants shared].userName = #"name";
from an NSObject class method (Which I call from a ViewController), I fail to do so.
But If I declare Constant variables directly from ViewController (after viewDidLoad for example) everything works fine.
Here is the Class I try to declare variables from, but I fail (It also has singleton in it, that might be the source of the problem, but im not sure why would it)
#implementation GoogleLogin
static GoogleLogin* gLogin = nil;
+(GoogleLogin*)shared
{
if (nil == gLogin){
gLogin = [[[self class]alloc]init];
}
return gLogin;
}
-(void)getProfile
{
GTLServicePlus* plusService = [[GTLServicePlus alloc] init];
plusService.retryEnabled = YES;
[plusService setAuthorizer:[GPPSignIn sharedInstance].authentication];
GTLQueryPlus *query = [GTLQueryPlus queryForPeopleGetWithUserId:#"me"];
plusService.apiVersion=#"v1";
[plusService executeQuery:query
completionHandler:^(GTLServiceTicket *ticket,
GTLPlusPerson *person,
NSError *error) {
if (error){
NSLog(#"Error while fetching user profile: %#", error);
}else{
NSLog(#"User profile information fetched OK");
[Constants shared].googlePlusUser = person;
[Constants shared].profileType = 1;
[Constants shared].userName = person.name.givenName;
[Constants shared].userLastName = person.name.familyName;
[Constants shared].userEmail = [GPPSignIn sharedInstance].authentication.userEmail;
[Constants shared].userGoogleId = person.identifier;
[Constants shared].userProfilePicture = person.image.url;
NSLog(#"%# %# %# %# %# ",person.name.givenName,person.name.familyName,[GPPSignIn sharedInstance].authentication.userEmail,person.identifier,person.image.url);
}
}];
}
and this is how I call those methods, from my ViewController:
- (IBAction)signupWithGoogle:(UIButton *)sender {
//if i call this method here, on button click, it will finish all the steps needed, except setting constant variables
[[GoogleLogin shared] googleLoginFromViewController:self];
//if I uncomment next line, username will be declared and I will be able to access it later
//[Constants shared].userName = #"Petar";
}
Can anybody figure out why is this happening and what should I do to change that?
When you define a property is strongly suggested to declare the attributes to use with it. I guess the compiler should complain about this with a message like
No 'assign', 'retain', or 'copy' attribute is specified - 'assign' is
assumed
So, use the following instead (copy semantics is fine for mutable classes).
#property (nonatomic, copy) NSString *myString;
You should also specify if the property should be accessed in a atomic or nonatomic way. If you don't specify it, the former will be applied.
Then, you are using a singleton pattern. The suggested way is to use GCD like so.
+ (ConstantsManager*)sharedManager {
static ConstantsManager *sharedManager;
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
sharedManager = [[[self class] alloc] init];
});
return sharedManager;
}
Well you did not set your property attributes on the singleton class.
For example,
#property (nonatomic, strong, readonly) ...
Have you tried moving the property assignments out of the completionHandler? It may be that your properties are being assigned on a background thread and your view controller is not catching the assignment. An easy way to check is to override the setters and getters and put breakpoints in them to see what order they are being accessed.
1) Remove the #synthesize because it's not needed (properties will be synthesized as _property automatically)
2) Override setter & getter
-(void)setProfileType:(NSInteger)profileType {
_profileType = profileType;
}
-(NSInteger)profileType {
return _profileType;
}
3) Place breakpoints within these methods and see if the getter is being called before the setter. Alternatively, if simply moving the assignments out of the completionHandler fixes it you know you have some concurrency issues.
I suggest reading up on atomic/nonatomic properties, #synthesize and Objective-C concurrency.
I am having a lot of trouble wrapping my head around the best way to use blocks. I am trying to retrieve pedometer data, and the method of accessing the data is a block...
[self.pedometer queryPedometerDataFromDate:yesterday
toDate:midnightOfToday
withHandler:^(CMPedometerData *pedometerData, NSError *error) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
if (error) {
NSLog(#"Pedometer is NOT available.");
}
else {
NSLog(#"Steps %#", pedometerData.numberOfSteps);
yesterdaysNumbersLabel.text = [pedometerData.numberOfSteps stringValue];
[pedometerDictionary setValue:[pedometerData.numberOfSteps stringValue] forKey:#"2"];
}
});
}];
Using the above code I am able to get the data, log the data, and update the label on the screen, But I can't figure out how to set the data into an array or dictionary so I can do something else with it.
I understand why the arrays and dictionaries are always null... the blocks are running on a different thread and I am accessing them before the blocks have completed.
Can someone help me get through my head how to do something more with the data.
Update 1:
Right now I have this in .h
#property (strong, atomic) NSMutableDictionary *pedometerDictionary;
and I am synthesizing it in .m and I call this...
[self getNumbersForYesterday];
NSLog(#"Dictionary: %#", pedometerDictionary);
...which runs the above function and immediately tries to log the result. And like I said, I understand all the reasons it is NOT working. I just need to figure out how to change what i am doing to get it working.
Update 2:
This is in .h
#property (strong, atomic) NSMutableDictionary *pedometerDictionary;
and this is in .m
#synthesize pedometerDictionary;
- (id)init {
self = [super init];
if (self != nil) {
self.pedometerDictionary = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] init];
}
return self;
}
and I am using it like this.
[self getNumbersForYesterday];
NSLog(#"Dictionary: %#", self.pedometerDictionary);
to call this.
- (void)getNumbersForYesterday {
[self.pedometer queryPedometerDataFromDate:yesterday
toDate:midnightOfToday
withHandler:^(CMPedometerData *pedometerData, NSError *error) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
if (error) {
NSLog(#"Pedometer is NOT available.");
}
else {
NSLog(#"Steps %#", pedometerData.numberOfSteps);
yesterdaysNumbersLabel.text = [pedometerData.numberOfSteps stringValue];
[self.pedometerDictionary setValue:[pedometerData.numberOfSteps stringValue] forKey:#"2"];
}
});
}];
}
If I just wanted to keep all the work in the block I would be fine. What I have come to understand is that since blocks are asynchronous, I am trying to NSLog my dictionary, and the block isn't finished running yet. So, my dictionary is still NULL.
Dollars to donuts, your pedometerDictionary was never created in the first place (or it was, but the declaration isn't in a useful spot).
I.e. where is your line of code that says pedometerDictionary = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] init];? And where is pedometerDictionary declared? How did you try to NSLog() values from it?
Also, use setObject:forKey:.
It is also odd that it is named pedometerDictionary. That is evidence that it is either declared as a global (which it shouldn't be), a local variable of whatever method contains the above code (which won't work), or you are declaring and using an instance variable directly.
The issue you are having is not a block timing issue, your dictionary should never be nil at worst it would contain no values.
You need to create your dictionary before using it. The appropriate place would be init method for most objects. If you are creating your object in Interface Builder then the method should be awakeFromNib.
To do something with the dictionary you can use an NSTimer or call a method from queryPedometerDataFromDate block handler. The use of #synchronized() directive is an example of how to keep access to the dictionary from overlapping at the same time in a threaded environment. This is not the case in this particular example as you are dispatching on the main thread and NSTimer also runs on the main thread. But should you go threaded #synchronized() would keep you from overlapping access.
#interface HelloWorld : NSObject
#property (retain, atomic) NSMutableDictionary *pedometerDictionary;
#property (retain, nonatomic) NSTimer *timer;
#end
#implementation HelloWorld
#synthesize pedometerDictionary, timer;
...
- (id)init {
self = [super init];
if (self != nil) {
self.pedometerDictionary = [NSMutableDictionary dictionary];
self.timer = [NSTimer timerWithTimeInterval:5.0 target:self selector:#selector(doSomethingInterestingWithDictionary:) userInfo:nil repeats:YES];
}
return self;
}
or
- (void)awakeFromNib {
self.pedometerDictionary = [NSMutableDictionary dictionary];
self.timer = [NSTimer timerWithTimeInterval:5.0 target:self selector:#selector(doSomethingInterestingWithDictionary:) userInfo:nil repeats:YES];
}
...
- (void)getNumbersForYesterday {
[self.pedometer queryPedometerDataFromDate:yesterday
toDate:midnightOfToday
withHandler:^(CMPedometerData *pedometerData, NSError *error) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
if (error) {
NSLog(#"Pedometer is NOT available.");
}
else {
NSLog(#"Steps %#", pedometerData.numberOfSteps);
yesterdaysNumbersLabel.text = [pedometerData.numberOfSteps stringValue];
#synchronized (self) {
[self.pedometerDictionary setValue:[pedometerData.numberOfSteps stringValue] forKey:#"2"];
}
[self doSomethingInterestingWithDictionary:nil];
}
});
}];
}
// Will be called when queryPedometerDataFromDate returns and from a timer every 5 seconds.
- (void)doSomethingInterestingWithDictionary:(NSTimer *)aTimer {
#synchronized (self) {
NSLog(#"My days dictionary: %#", self.pedometerDictionary);
}
}
I'd like my class to detect that a new instance is equivalent (vis a vis isEqual: and hash) to some existing instance, and create only unique instances. Here's code that I think does the job, but I'm concerned it's doing something dumb that I can't spot...
Say it's an NSURLRequest subclass like this:
// MyClass.h
#interface MyClass : NSMutableURLRequest
#end
// MyClass.m
#implementation MyClass
+ (NSMutableSet *)instances {
static NSMutableSet *_instances;
static dispatch_once_t once;
dispatch_once(&once, ^{ _instances = [[NSMutableSet alloc] init];});
return _instances;
}
- (id)initWithURL:(NSURL *)URL {
self = [super initWithURL:URL];
if (self) {
if ([self.class.instances containsObject:self])
self = [self.class.instances member:self];
else
[self.class.instances addObject:self];
}
return self;
}
// Caller.m
NSURL *urlA = [NSURL urlWithString:#"http://www.yahoo.com"];
MyClass *instance0 = [[MyClass alloc] initWithURL: urlA];
MyClass *instance1 = [[MyClass alloc] initWithURL: urlA]; // 2
BOOL works = instance0 == instance1; // works => YES, but at what hidden cost?
Questions:
That second assignment to self in init looks weird, but not insane.
Or is it?
Is it just wishful coding to think that second alloc (of instance1) gets magically cleaned up?
It's not insane, but in manual retain/release mode, you do need to release self beforehand or you'll leak an uninitialized object every time this method is run. In ARC, the original instance will automatically be released for you.
See #1.
BTW, for any readers who usually stop at one answer, bbum's answer below includes a full working example of a thread-safe implementation. Highly recommended for anyone making a class that does this.
Thought of a better way (original answer below the line) assuming you really want to unique by URL. If not, this also demonstrates the synchronization primitive use.
#interface UniqueByURLInstances:NSObject
#property(strong) NSURL *url;
#end
#implementation UniqueByURLInstances
static NSMutableDictionary *InstanceCache()
{
static NSMutableDictionary *cache;
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
cache = [NSMutableDictionary new];
});
return cache;
}
static dispatch_queue_t InstanceSerializationQueue()
{
static dispatch_queue_t queue;
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
queue = dispatch_queue_create("UniqueByURLInstances queue", DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL);
});
return queue;
}
+ (instancetype)instanceWithURL:(NSURL*)URL
{
__block UniqueByURLInstances *returnValue = nil;
dispatch_sync(InstanceSerializationQueue(), ^{
returnValue = [InstanceCache() objectForKey:URL];
if (!returnValue)
{
returnValue = [[self alloc] initWithURL:URL];
}
});
return returnValue;
}
- (id)initWithURL:(NSURL *)URL
{
__block UniqueByURLInstances* returnValue = self;
dispatch_sync(InstanceSerializationQueue(), ^{
returnValue = [InstanceCache() objectForKey:URL];
if (returnValue) return;
returnValue = [super initWithURL:URL];
if (returnValue) {
[InstanceCache() setObject:returnValue forKey:URL];
}
_url = URL;
});
return returnValue;
}
- (void)dealloc {
dispatch_sync(InstanceSerializationQueue(), ^{
[InstanceCache() removeObjectForKey:_url];
});
// rest o' dealloc dance here
}
#end
Caveat: Above was typed into SO -- never been run. I may have screwed something up. It assumes ARC is enabled. Yes, it'll end up looking up URL twice when using the factory method, but that extra lookup should be lost in the noise of allocation and initialization. Doing that means that the developer could use either the factory or the initializer and still see unique'd instances but there will be no allocation on execution of the factory method when the instance for that URL already exists.
(If you can't unique by URL, then go back to your NSMutableSet and skip the factory method entirely.)
What Chuck said, but some additional notes:
Restructure your code like this:
+(NSMutableSet*)instances
{
static NSMutableSet *_instances;
dispatch_once( ...., ^{ _instances = [[NSMutableSet alloc] init];});
return instances;
}
Then call that method whenever you want access to instances. It localizes all the code in one spot and isolates it from +initialize (which isn't really a big deal).
If your class may be instantiated from multiple threads, you'll want to surround the check-allocate-or-return with a synchronization primitive. I would suggest a dispatch_queue.
I have a problem with an singleton pattern.
I have read the following tutorials about singleton classes and have created my own.
http://www.galloway.me.uk/utorials/singleton-classes/
http://www.johnwordsworth.com/2010/04/iphone-code-snippet-the-singleton-pattern/
The first time i build & run the app it works like it should. No problems at all!
But when i rebuild the app the singleton class does not work properly anymore. The first init works like it should but when i call it again after a button click it crashes my app.
My singleton class:
BPManager.h
#interface BPManager : NSObject {
NSString *dbPath;
}
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSString *dbPath;
+ (id)bpManager;
- (void)initDatabase:(NSString *)dbName;
- (int)getQuestions;
#end
BPManager.m
static BPManager *sharedMyManager = nil;
#implementation BPManager
#synthesize dbPath;
- (void)initDatabase:(NSString *)dbName
{
dbPath = dbName;
}
-(int)getQuestions
{
NSLog(#"getQuestions");
}
- (id)init {
if ((self = [super init])) {
}
return self;
}
+ (BPManager *) bpManager {
#synchronized(self) {
if(sharedMyManager != nil) return sharedMyManager;
static dispatch_once_t pred; // Lock
dispatch_once(&pred, ^{ // This code is called at most once per app
sharedMyManager = [[BPManager alloc] init];
});
}
return sharedMyManager;
}
- (void)dealloc {
[dbPath release];
[super dealloc];
}
When i call the following code when building my interface, the app creates the singleton:
BPManager *manager = [BPManager bpManager];
[manager initDatabase:#"database.db"];
Note: At this point i can create references to the class from other files as well. But when i click on a button it seems to loose his references.
But when a button is clicked, the following code is ecexuted:
BPManager *manager = [BPManager bpManager];
int count = [manager getQuestions];
The app should get the sharedInstance. That works, only the parameters (like dbPath) are not accessible. Why is that?
Edit:
after some research, i have changed the method to:
+ (BPManager *) bpManager {
#synchronized(self) {
if(sharedMyManager != nil) return sharedMyManager;
static dispatch_once_t pred; // Lock
dispatch_once(&pred, ^{ // This code is called at most once per app
sharedMyManager = [[BPManager alloc] init];
});
}
return sharedMyManager;
}
But the problem is not solved
How about
#interface BPManager : NSObject
#property (nonatomic, copy) NSString *dbName;
#property (nonatomic, assign) int questions;
-(id) initWithDBName:(NSString*) dbName {
#end
#import "BPManager.h"
#implementation BPManager
#synthesize dbName=_dbName, questions;
+(BPManager *)singleton {
static dispatch_once_t pred;
static BPManager *shared = nil;
dispatch_once(&pred, ^{
shared = [[BPManager alloc] initWithDBName:#"database.db"];
});
return shared;
}
-(id) initWithDBName:(NSString*) dbName {
self = [super init]
if (self) self.dbName = dbName;
return self;
}
-(void)dealloc {
[_dbName release];
[super dealloc];
}
#end
BPManager *manager = [BPManager singleton];
int count = [manager questions];
The static is private to the implementation file but no reason it should be even accessible outside the singleton method. The init overrides the default implementation with the default implementation so it's useless. In Objective-C you name the getter with the var name (count), not getCount. Initializing a class twice causes an undefined behaviour. No need to synchronize or check for if==nil when you are already using dispatch_once, see Care and Feeding of Singletons. NSString should always use copy instead retain in #property. You don't need the dealloc because this is going to be active forever while your app is running, but it's just there in case you want to use this class as a non singleton . And you probably are as good with this class being an ivar in your delegate instead a singleton, but you can have it both ways.
I'm not sure whether it's the (complete) answer, but one major flaw is that you're using instance variables (self, super) in a class method, +(id)bpManager; I'm actually surprised it let you compile that at all. Change the #synchronized(self) to #synchronized(sharedMyManager), and the [[super alloc...] init] to [[BPManager alloc...] init]. And, writing that just made me realize that the problem looks like accessing a subclassed method on an object instantiated as the superclass, but that should have been overwritten in the dispatch. Shouldn't you really only need one of those anyway, why double-init like that? (And while we're there, that's a memory leak - init'd in the if() and then overwritten in the closure without releasing it.)
The solution of Jano must work well. I use this way too to create singleton object. And I don't have any problem.
For your code, I think that if you use #synchronized (it's not necessary cause your have dispatch_once_t as Jano said), you should not call return in #synchronized.
+ (BPManager *) bpManager {
#synchronized(self) {
if(sharedMyManager == nil) {
static dispatch_once_t pred; // Lock
dispatch_once(&pred, ^{ // This code is called at most once per app
sharedMyManager = [[BPManager alloc] init];
});
}
}
return sharedMyManager;
}