Instead of providing this method, switch the property away from readonly and make sure the memory semantics are clear i.e. is this retaining a weak or strong reference?

Add NS_UNAVAILABLE init and NS_DESIGNATED_INITIALIZER for this initializer to force people to use this initializer.

The initWithSemanticsObject still uses init, I can't NS_UNAVAILABLE the init?

nvm i got it

Instead of mutating the parameter, just return a new SkPoint. That leads to more clear usage.

Please move this to a property so the memory semantics are explicit.

Add curly braces please https://google.github.io/styleguide/objcguide.html#conditionals

Why get rid of this flimsy protection?

the parent become a public property, do we still want to keep this?

I would. I admit it is flimsy but it at least brings attention to it.

The name of this method doesn't seem to match to me with where it is being called. If i had to name it I'd call it accessibilityBridgeWillVisitObjectsRecursivelyAndRemove, know what I mean?

The accessibilityBridgeWillVisitObjectsRecursivelyAndRemove name is vague and is hard to interpret. I put it in VisitObjectsRecursivelyAndRemove because I don't want to do another tree walk just to call this method.

The problem with what it is called now is that is leaking context information about where VisitObjectsRecursivelyAndRemove is called into calls higher in the call stack. Would it make more sense to move that to where VisitObjectsRecursivelyAndRemove is being called? Maybe you could make a method like this:

void finishUpdating(bridge, object) {
  doomed_uids = calculateDoomedUids();
  [object accessibilityBridgeDidFinishUpdate];
  bridge->VisitObjectsRecursivelyAndRemove(object, doomed_uids);
}

That would make the name make more sense.

You should use _semanticsObject = [semanticsObject retain]; You aren't suppose to reference properties through self in init methods.