This has changed in Xcode 4.

Now Apps can be exported from the &quot;Organizer&quot;

If you haven&#39;t already, you need to create an `Archive`.

On the menu go to `Product -&gt; Archive`

Once you&#39;re in the `Organizer - Archives` screen click `Share` or `Distribute...` (Xcode 4.3.3 or newer)

Then choose the format you want to export.

the app is generally under your 

    project_dir/build/Debug/Name Of App 
    project_dir/build/Release/Name Of App
    project_dir/build/Distribution/Name Of App 

depending on which configuration of build you did or want to send.


On Xcode 13 you need to choose `Product -&gt; Destination -&gt; Any iOS device (arm64)`.

Then afterwards you can run `Product -&gt; Archive`.

to get to the .app application you have to go into the folder where you created it into build the your app will be there

I have a model defined like this:

    class UserDetail(models.Model):
        user = models.ForeignKey(User, db_index=True, unique=True, related_name=&#39;details&#39;)
        favourites = models.ManyToManyField(Article, related_name=&#39;favourited_by&#39;, blank=True)

And I&#39;m trying to do something like this:

    article = get_object_or_404(Article, pk=id)
    request.user.details.favourites.add(article)

Why isn&#39;t it working?

I&#39;m getting this error:

&gt; &#39;RelatedManager&#39; object has no attribute &#39;favourites&#39;

I guess `details` isn&#39;t the right type, but why isn&#39;t it? And how can I perform a query like that?


&#39;RelatedManager&#39; object has no attribute

I have created custom exception class

    public class Web2PDFException : Exception
    {
        public Web2PDFException(string message, Exception innerException)
            : base(message, innerException) { ... }
    }

In my application how can I find out if it is my custom exception or not? 

    try {  ...  }

    catch (Exception err)
    {
    //Find exception type here
    }

Identifying Exception Type in a handler Catch Block

I feel silly for having to ask this.  I&#39;ve got an application to a point where I want to send someone a beta to test on their machine, but I don&#39;t know how to get Xcode to produce a `.app` file for me to send to them.  Help?

How do you export your finished application from Xcode?

<p>I feel silly for having to ask this.  I've got an application to a point where I want to send someone a beta to test on their machine, but I don't know how to get Xcode to produce a <code>.app</code> file for me to send to them.  Help?</p>


I use a standard user account for my daily tasks on Mac OS. Since upgrading to Snow Leopard I am asked to do the following when a program is run from within Xcode:

&quot;Type the name and password of a user in the &#39;Developer Tools&#39; group to allow Developer Tools Access to make changes&quot;

While I know the admin username/password, this is annoying (though only required once per login).

The developer tools access is asking for rights to &quot;system.privilege.taskport.debug&quot; from application gdb-i386-apple-darwin.

What is the best way around this?

Authorize a non-admin developer in Xcode / Mac OS

I have some code that needs to run after the a `UIWebView` finishes loading a document.  For that I&#39;ve set the `UIWebView`&#39;s delegate to my controller, and implemented the `webViewDidFinishLoading` method.

This gets called multiple times, depending on the type of page to load.  I&#39;m not sure if it&#39;s because of ajax requests, requests for images, or maybe even iframes.

Is there a way to tell that the main request has finished, meaning the HTML is completely loaded?

Or perhaps delay my code from firing until all of those events are done firing?

UIWebView didFinishLoading fires multiple times

Some code I am unit testing needs to load a resource file. It contains the following line:

    NSString *path = [[NSBundle mainBundle] pathForResource:@&quot;foo&quot; ofType:@&quot;txt&quot;];

In the app it runs just fine, but when run by the unit testing framework `pathForResource:` returns nil, meaning it could not locate `foo.txt`.

I&#39;ve made sure that `foo.txt` is included in the **Copy Bundle Resources** build phase of the unit test target, so why can&#39;t it find the file?

Why can&#39;t code inside unit tests find bundle resources?

I&#39;m supporting 10.4+ by picking the most-current API at runtime:

    if ([fileManager respondsToSelector:@selector(removeItemAtPath:error:)])
    	[fileManager removeItemAtPath:downloadDir error:NULL];
    else
    	[fileManager removeFileAtPath:downloadDir handler:nil];

In this case, 10.5 and up will use `removeItemAtPath:error:` and 10.4 will use `removeFileAtPath:handler:`. Great, but I still get compiler warnings for the old methods:

    warning: &#39;removeFileAtPath:handler:&#39; is deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]

Is there a syntax of `if([… respondsToSelector:@selector(…)]){ … } else { … }` that hints the compiler (Clang) to not warn on that line?

If not, is there a way to tag that line to be ignored for `-Wdeprecated-declarations`?

---

After seeing some of the answers, let me clarify that confusing the compiler into not knowing what I&#39;m doing is not a valid solution.

Suppressing &quot;&#39;…&#39; is deprecated&quot; when using respondsToSelector

I have created an xcode project. Now I want to give .app file to my friend to use that application. From where do I get this file? How to install this .app file in his Applications folder using an installer package?

How to get .app file of a xcode application

I doubt if there is a way to make compile-time conditions in Java like #ifdef #ifndef in C++.
  
My problem is that have an algorithm written in Java, and I have different running time improves to that algorithm. So I want to measure how much time I save when each improve is used.

Right now I have a set of boolean variables that are used to decide during the running time which improve should be used and which not. But even testing those variables influences the total running time.  

So I want to find out a way to decide during the compilation time which parts of the program should be compiled and used.  

Does someone knows a way to do it in Java. Or maybe someone knows that there is no such way (it also would be useful).

#ifdef #ifndef in Java

I am new to the Python programming language. I was wondering if it is possible to compile a program to written in Python.

Is it possible to convert Python scripts to some lower level programming languages which then can be compiled to binary code?

A developer who is considering to code in Python might want to keep the possibility open to be able to go for binary distribution later. 

Is it possible to compile a program written in Python?

The canonical JVM implementation from Sun applies some pretty sophisticated optimization to bytecode to obtain near-native execution speeds after the code has been run a few times. 

The question is, why isn&#39;t this compiled code cached to disk for use during subsequent uses of the same function/class?

As it stands, every time a program is executed, the JIT compiler kicks in afresh, rather than using a pre-compiled version of the code. Wouldn&#39;t adding this feature add a significant boost to the initial run time of the program, when the bytecode is essentially being interpreted?

Why doesn&#39;t the JVM cache JIT compiled code?

&gt; **Possible Duplicate:**  
&gt; [How do I create an .exe for a Java program?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/516399/how-do-i-create-an-exe-for-a-java-program)  

&lt;!-- End of automatically inserted text --&gt;

I&#39;ve just made a simple program with Eclipse and I want to compile it into an executable, but simply can&#39;t seem to find out how to do it.

Compiling a java program into an executable

I&#39;ve been thinking about it lately, and it seems to me that most advantages given to **JIT** compilation should more or less be attributed to the intermediate format instead, and that jitting in itself is not much of a good way to generate code.

So these are the main **pro-JIT** compilation arguments I usually hear:

1. **Just-in-time compilation allows for greater portability.** Isn&#39;t that attributable to the intermediate format? I mean, nothing keeps you from compiling your virtual bytecode into native bytecode once you&#39;ve got it on your machine. Portability is an issue in the &#39;distribution&#39; phase, not during the &#39;running&#39; phase.
1. **Okay, then what about generating code at runtime?** Well, the same applies. Nothing keeps you from integrating a just-in-time compiler for a real just-in-time need into your native program.
1. **But the runtime compiles it to native code just once anyways, and stores the resulting executable in some sort of cache somewhere on your hard drive.** Yeah, sure. But it&#39;s optimized your program under time constraints, and it&#39;s not making it better from there on. See the next paragraph.

It&#39;s not like **ahead-of-time** compilation had no advantages either. **Just-in-time** compilation has time constraints: you can&#39;t keep the end user waiting forever while your program launches, so it has a tradeoff to do somewhere. Most of the time they just optimize less. A friend of mine had _profiling evidence_ that inlining functions and unrolling loops &quot;manually&quot; (obfuscating source code in the process) had a positive impact on performance on his **C#** number-crunching program; doing the same on my side, with my **C** program filling the same task, yielded no positive results, and I believe this is due to the extensive transformations my compiler was allowed to make. 

And yet we&#39;re surrounded by jitted programs. **C#** and **Java** are everywhere, Python scripts can compile to some sort of bytecode, and I&#39;m sure a whole bunch of other programming languages do the same. There must be a good reason that I&#39;m missing. So what makes **just-in-time** compilation so superior to **ahead-of-time** compilation?


----------


**EDIT** To clear some confusion, maybe it would be important to state that I&#39;m all for an intermediate representation of executables. This has a lot of advantages (and really, most arguments for **just-in-time** compilation are actually arguments for an intermediate representation). My question is about how they should be compiled to native code.

Most runtimes (or compilers for that matter) will prefer to either compile them just-in-time or ahead-of-time. As **ahead-of-time** compilation looks like a better alternative to me because the compiler has more time to perform optimizations, I&#39;m wondering why Microsoft, Sun and all the others are going the other way around. I&#39;m kind of dubious about profiling-related optimizations, as my experience with **just-in-time** compiled programs displayed poor basic optimizations.

I used an example with C code only because I needed an example of **ahead-of-time** compilation versus **just-in-time** compilation. The fact that **C** code wasn&#39;t emitted to an intermediate representation is irrelevant to the situation, as I just needed to show that **ahead-of-time** compilation can yield better immediate results.

What are the advantages of just-in-time compilation versus ahead-of-time compilation?

I need to know when the [`finalize()`](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/10/docs/api/java/lang/Object.html#finalize()) method is called in the `JVM`. I created a test class which writes into a file when the `finalize()` method is called by overriding it. It is not executed. Can anybody tell me the reason why it is not executing?

When is the finalize() method called in Java?

In Java, what purpose do the keywords `final`, `finally` and `finalize` fulfil? 


I encountered this question in an interview with following options:

&gt; How to destroy an object in java?  

    a. System.gc();  
    b. Runtime.getRuntime.gc();  
    c. object.delete();  
    d. object.finalize();  
    e. Java performs gc by itself, no need to do it manually.

1. The answer should be e? 

2. what if e was not there? then ?
clearly c is not the answer. a and b will do gc for the whole application(question requires for one object). 
I think it is d because finalize() is called just prior to gc(but is it necessary that after finalize gc is invoked ?) or I am wrong ? e must be there to answer this question ?

how to destroy an object in java?

I am studying how garbage collector works in c#. I am confused over the use of `Destructor`, `Dispose` and `Finalize` methods. 

As per my research and understandings, having a Destructor method within my class will tell the garbage collector to perform the garbage collection in the way mentioned in the destructor method which cannot be called explicitly on the instances of the class. 

The `Dispose` method is meant to provide the user to control the garbage collection.  The `Finalize` method frees the resources used by the class, but not the object itself. 

I am not sure if I understand it the right way. Please clarify the doubts. Any further links or guides are welcome.


Content Type	Original Author	Original Content on Stackoverflow
Question	Kaji	View Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - Xcode	Matthew Rudy	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - Xcode	mtvee	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - Xcode	pascalre	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 4 - Xcode	Harry Fox	View Answer on Stackoverflow

How do you export your finished application from Xcode?

Xcode Problem Overview

Xcode Solutions

Solution 1 - Xcode

Solution 2 - Xcode

Solution 3 - Xcode

Solution 4 - Xcode

Identifying Exception Type in a handler Catch Block

'RelatedManager' object has no attribute

Attributions