Pros/cons of implementing a particular set of delegate methods versus not implementing them and the effects of implementing one but not another? - swift

In regards to UITableView & UICollectionView & their respective protocols, UITableViewDataSource & UITableViewDelegate + UICollectionViewDelegate & UICollectionViewDataSource -- are there any pros and cons to implementing one method, but not the other or a particular set of methods and not the rest of the methods or a unique combination of specific methods?
For example, if I am to implement heightForFooter but not viewForFooter - what happens or can happen? Does this negative impact performance or the scroll of the table view?
Is there a guide which shows that which if any methods are implemented, others should be combined and dually implemented alongside them?

Re: correctness
Is there a guide which shows that which if any methods are implemented, others should be combined and dually implemented alongside them?
Not from what I've seen, though sometimes the documentation mentions it. E.g. from the docs of NSTableViewDataSource:
If you’re not using Cocoa bindings to provide data to the table view, the following methods are required:
numberOfRows(in:)
tableView(_:objectValueFor:row:)
tableView(_:setObjectValue:for:row:) (cell-based tables only)
In general, if a method is optional, but required from the context, then there will be a runtime error telling you to implment it, e.g.:
Illegal NSTableView data source (Foo). Must implement numberOfRowsInTableView: and tableView:objectValueForTableColumn:row:
Either that, or stuff will silently fail (e.g. if you don't implement NSTableViewDelegate.tableView(_:viewFor:row:), no drawing will happen, and all your cells will just be blank views.
Re: performance
There shouldn't be any real performance difference with not implementing optional methods.
Each of these methods is likely called as if you had this in Swift (most of these frameworks are still implemented in Objective C):
let result: Result? = yourTarget.someMethod?(someArg)
which is really just shorthand for:
let result: Result? = yourTarget.responds(to: #selector(YourTargetsClass.someMethod))
? target.method(someArg)
: nil
That is, it's one dynamic method lookup to check if your object responds to the message, and one dynamic message send to actually invoke the method (for the case where it does respond).
There's a teeny tiny optimization that one could squeeze out here: if your method implementation is empty, then you're better off not having it at all. That will prevent a needless message send. Though it's obviously not something to worry about until you're sure it's a hotspot in a profiler.
Of course, nothing stops a library author from writing:
if yourObject.responds(to: #selector(someMessage)) {
doSomethingVeryExpensiveForNoGoodReason()
}
... but that's unlikely.

Related

Can't subclass DispatchGroup - "only visible via the Objective-C runtime"?

It's not possible to subclass DispatchGroup, how to do so?
Note:
this has finally been fixed in iOS 10+
Example, carry a stateful package with a group,
class PushDispatchGroup: DispatchGroup {
var sentIds: [(tableName: String, rowId: String)] = []
}
thanks to shallowThought for pointing out this is fixed in iOS10.
how to inherit from a class which is 'only visible via the Objective-C runtime'?
You don't.
This is not wrapped around a proper "object" the way you're thinking about it. It's wrapped around a dispatch_group, which is a C struct. This class is not designed to be subclassed and does not bridge in a normal way to ObjC, so you can't subclass it there either.
"Objects" that bridge directly to low level C types often have very unusual structures that parts of the system are hard-coded to know how to deal with (this happens all the time with toll-free bridging like NSString and CFString). In many cases, the types are designed to be identical in memory layout through careful choice of structure (I haven't picked apart DispatchGroup, but it looks like one from this group). When that's true, you can't add any storage because then the memory layout will be different and you break the bridging.
As various commenters have said, you also shouldn't be doing this, which is why there is no easy answer for how to do this. Classes that are not explicitly designed for subclassing are intentionally difficult or impossible to subclass in Swift (this comes up regularly around less tricky types than DispatchGroup, and the answer is the same: it's intentional; don't do it).

Best way to do init without repeating code?

Each view class has multiple init methods - ones already included as part of UIView, and then additional ones - and each of them set up the same elements in the same way. I therefore usually have them all running a [self initialSetup]; method, which includes the setting up of all of these elements.
The problem i've ran into is that if a subclass also has an initialSetup method, it would override the superclass initialSetup method, and thus the superclass would have to have the method be public in order to still function. This causes problems with organisation, as the method should never be called other than from init, so has no reason to be public.
You've hit upon a problem that there's no perfect fix for. What you'd ideally have is a method that can't be subclassed in the normal sense, that's accessible only to instances of that exact type of class.
Where this is a risk, the normal practice seems to be to incorporate the class name into the setup method. So instead of initialSetup you'd have something like myViewSubclassInitialSetup.
You can also add something like this at the top of your method:
NSAssert([self isMemberOfClass:[ThisClass class]],
#"IniitalSetup called by sub- or superclass")
Then your debug builds will raise an exception if a subclass or superclass ends up calling your init method. That'll give you a place for a breakpoint and a stacktrace that should allow you to find the problem very quickly.
It won't add any code to your release builds.
Change the name of initialSetup to something like initialSetupClassName - subclasses, even if they accidentally used the same pattern, would not use the same name as they had a different class name.
You can also use an "_" prefix for private methods you would rather not be called, but the subclasser may do that also.
It sounds like you are missing a designated initializer. Designate one initializer as the official one that actually performs the setup, and have all the others just call that with some degree of customization. Usually the designated initializer will be the one with the most detail — for example, if you have init, initWithName:, initWithName:age: and initAsFiveYearOldNamed:, the designated initializer will be initWithName:age: and the other initializers would just call that method with the arguments filled in appropriately.
Unfortunatly Objective C doesn't provide a way to achieve that in a "clean" way. The ideal solution would be a protected method. But that's not possible in Objective C
Apple had this problem, when they were creating the UIGestureRecognizer. There were some methods they really didn't want to get called by somebody, but which had to be overwritten by subclasses. The way they chose to deal with this, was to create a seperate header file (UIGestureRecognizerSubclass.h), that contains a category to the original UIGestureRecognizer with those "protected" methods. The additional header is only to be imported by subclasses (i.e. for subclassing purposes). See UIGestureRecognizer Class Reference for some details.
Of course that doesn't prevent anybody from misusing the additional header file, but at least it clearly states your intention and keeps your code well structured. Also you won't be "bothered" by autocompletion for the additional methods, when just using the class.
Personally I only use an additional header, if it is extremely important that nobody calls it directly. In most cases I think it's ok to use public methods and make a note for what it's inteded. The iOS Framework also has many of these cases. F.e. many methods of UIViewController's viewDidLoad etc.

Core data refactoring

Hi
Normally all the methods like
'- (NSFetchedResultsController *)fetchedResultsController '
are placed in the code of view controllers. I find it a bit messy to write Data Fetching code along with lifecycle methods or table delegate methods.
So my point is should I refactor the CoreData methods to some other helper class say DataLoader and then call them in view controllers?
Is this a wrong thing to do or am I going to loose some coding benefits of Core Data methods.
I would say moving the fetchedResultsController to a helper class is a good idea.
A problem I encounter often is to get the spelling of attributes right.
For example I do a predicate and want to filter on an attribute called #"isSelected". There is no check by the compiler nor by the linker to check the string isSelected. I will have to double check each line where the string has been used.
A search&replace won't work on the misspellings because I don't know what bugs have been introduced.
When I get the predicate wrong then no results will be fetched. Problem is that I don't know if there are no matching rows or if I have filtered wrong. I will need to check at runtime and that consumes time.
For predicates the saved templates exist, so predicates are not a perfect example. But think about value forKey: and we are at square one.
Now if all the fetchedResultsController are in one file then checking would become easier. At least it reduces the possibility of missing that little misspelling in a far away and rarely used class.
...or am I going to loose some coding benefits of Core Data methods.
I tend to say no, but other please feel free to jump in.
#Mann yes of course you can do that without loosing any coding benefits.....if u don't want to write Data Fetching code in you view Controller do not write there.....Make any other class lets say it DataLoader and write the fetching code in method of this class......and call this method by making the object of DataLoader class ....u will be able to fetch data from database
Hope u get it!

Changing cell appearance when editing UITableView _without_ using custom cells?

If I am using a custom UITableViewCell I can use the following methods to change the cell's appearance when transitioning state:
- (void)willTransitionToState:(UITableViewCellStateMask)state
- (void)didTransitionToState:(UITableViewCellStateMask)state
Is there a way to achieve this if I'm not using a custom tableview cell?
Edit: Please see Daniel Hanly's comment. Categories may be selectively applied using #import. My apologies to anyone that may have been misled by this answer. Relevant sections will be redacted for future reference.
Okay, attempt number two. As far as I am aware, there is no other documented way to implement the functionality you require without subclassing UITableViewCell. It's worth noting that Apple's docs on UITableViewCell specifically mention that the state transition methods are meant to be implemented by subclasses. That having been said, If you absolutely need to implement them without a subclass, there are a couple of less conventional solutions. Each comes with its own issues, and it may end up being unfeasible for you to implement them, but it's an interesting question nonetheless.
Disclaimer
If you only want a sane and relatively simple explanation, then consider the answer to your question to be "no, there is no way to do what you want." I only present the options below with the assertion that they will work. In no way do I endorse actually using them. Consider this my penance for providing my first answer with such an obvious flaw.
Option One - Categories
It is possible to get the functionality you're looking for by overriding the methods you listed in a custom UITableViewCell category.
The problem is that this approach would be a pretty bad idea 99% of the time. Once you define the category on UITableViewCell, those methods would be defined for all UITableViewCell objects throughout the app. Unless you want the exact same state transition functionality for every single table cell in the app, this approach isn't very helpful.
Option Two - Runtime magic
You can use the low-level Objective-C runtime functions to change the implementation of any method on the fly. Unlike the categories option, this approach is flexible enough to redefine the intended behavior whenever you need to, instead of being a one-shot deal.
For example, if you're trying to manage state transitions from a UITableViewController, you could do this:
CustomTableViewController.m
#import <objc/runtime.h>
- (void) customStateWillChange:(UITableViewCellStateMask)state
{
//custom UITableViewCell code
}
- (void) viewDidAppear:(BOOL)animated
{
//Store the original implementation
Method originalStateWillChangeMethod = class_getInstanceMethod([UITableViewCell class], #selector(willTransitionToState:));
originalStateWillChangeImplementation = method_getImplementation(originalStateWillChangeMethod); //variable declared in header file as type IMP
//Get the new implementation
Method newStateWillChangeMethod = class_getInstanceMethod([self class], #selector(customStateWillChange:));
IMP newStateWillChangeImplementation = method_getImplementation(newStateWillChangeMethod);
//Replace implementation
method_setImplementation(originalStateWillChangeMethod, newStateWillChangeImplementation);
//the rest of your viewDidAppear code
[super viewDidAppear:animated];
}
- (void) viewDidDisappear:(BOOL)animated
{
//restore the original implementation
Method originalStateWillChangeMethod = class_getInstanceMethod([UITableViewCell class], #selector(willTransitionToState:));
method_setImplementation(originalStateWillChangeMethod, originalStateWillChangeImplementation);
//rest of viewDidDisappear code
[super viewDidDisappear:animated];
}
This code may not suit your exact purposes, but I think it provides a useful example.
It's incredibly ugly though because the customStateWillChange: method defined here is only intended to be run as a part of the UITableViewCell class, but in this example it will be compiled as though it were part of the CustomTableController class. Among other annoyances, you would have to eschew the property dot notation, ignore compiler warnings and give up most if not all compile-time checks for that method's body.
Option 3 - Category with runtime magic
Exactly what it sounds like. Define any custom state change methods you like within a category (or several categories) on UITableViewCell. Be sure that each one has a separate name - adding two categories that each have a method of the same name will result in undefined behavior. Also, each one needs to have the same return type and argument types as the method it is intended to replace.
Then the references to [self class] in the above code would be replaced with [UITableViewCell class], and the customStateWillChange: method would be moved to the custom category. While still ugly, you can at least rely on the compiler to interpret the method bodies properly.
Of course, messing with the runtime adds a whole lot of complexity to keep track of. It could work fine, but it's not good design, it would take serious effort to ensure it worked safely and correctly, and it would be likely to bring anguish and despair to anyone maintaining it.
References
The Objective-C Programming Language - Categories and Extensions
Objective-C Runtime Reference
Absolutely. The UITableViewDelegate protocol specifies a number of methods to manage state transitions for the table view's cells. Take a look at the UITableViewDelegate Class Reference, specifically the methods listed under the heading "Editing Table Rows".
Edit
Sorry, you're right. The UITableViewDelegate methods don't respond to direct changes to the cell's properties. I've found a way that does work, but I'm going to put it in a different answer to avoid confusion.

What are best practices that you use when writing Objective-C and Cocoa? [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
I know about the HIG (which is quite handy!), but what programming practices do you use when writing Objective-C, and more specifically when using Cocoa (or CocoaTouch).
There are a few things I have started to do that I do not think are standard:
1) With the advent of properties, I no longer use "_" to prefix "private" class variables. After all, if a variable can be accessed by other classes shouldn't there be a property for it? I always disliked the "_" prefix for making code uglier, and now I can leave it out.
2) Speaking of private things, I prefer to place private method definitions within the .m file in a class extension like so:
#import "MyClass.h"
#interface MyClass ()
- (void) someMethod;
- (void) someOtherMethod;
#end
#implementation MyClass
Why clutter up the .h file with things outsiders should not care about? The empty () works for private categories in the .m file, and issues compile warnings if you do not implement the methods declared.
3) I have taken to putting dealloc at the top of the .m file, just below the #synthesize directives. Shouldn't what you dealloc be at the top of the list of things you want to think about in a class? That is especially true in an environment like the iPhone.
3.5) In table cells, make every element (including the cell itself) opaque for performance. That means setting the appropriate background color in everything.
3.6) When using an NSURLConnection, as a rule you may well want to implement the delegate method:
- (NSCachedURLResponse *)connection:(NSURLConnection *)connection
willCacheResponse:(NSCachedURLResponse *)cachedResponse
{
return nil;
}
I find most web calls are very singular and it's more the exception than the rule you'll be wanting responses cached, especially for web service calls. Implementing the method as shown disables caching of responses.
Also of interest, are some good iPhone specific tips from Joseph Mattiello (received in an iPhone mailing list). There are more, but these were the most generally useful I thought (note that a few bits have now been slightly edited from the original to include details offered in responses):
4) Only use double precision if you have to, such as when working with CoreLocation. Make sure you end your constants in 'f' to make gcc store them as floats.
float val = someFloat * 2.2f;
This is mostly important when someFloat may actually be a double, you don't need the mixed-mode math, since you're losing precision in 'val' on storage. While floating-point numbers are supported in hardware on iPhones, it may still take more time to do double-precision arithmetic as opposed to single precision. References:
Double vs float on the iPhone
iPhone/iPad double precision math
On the older phones supposedly calculations operate at the same speed but you can have more single precision components in registers than doubles, so for many calculations single precision will end up being faster.
5) Set your properties as nonatomic. They're atomic by default and upon synthesis, semaphore code will be created to prevent multi-threading problems. 99% of you probably don't need to worry about this and the code is much less bloated and more memory-efficient when set to nonatomic.
6) SQLite can be a very, very fast way to cache large data sets. A map application for instance can cache its tiles into SQLite files. The most expensive part is disk I/O. Avoid many small writes by sending BEGIN; and COMMIT; between large blocks. We use a 2 second timer for instance that resets on each new submit. When it expires, we send COMMIT; , which causes all your writes to go in one large chunk. SQLite stores transaction data to disk and doing this Begin/End wrapping avoids creation of many transaction files, grouping all of the transactions into one file.
Also, SQL will block your GUI if it's on your main thread. If you have a very long query, It's a good idea to store your queries as static objects, and run your SQL on a separate thread. Make sure to wrap anything that modifies the database for query strings in #synchronize() {} blocks. For short queries just leave things on the main thread for easier convenience.
More SQLite optimization tips are here, though the document appears out of date many of the points are probably still good;
http://web.utk.edu/~jplyon/sqlite/SQLite_optimization_FAQ.html
Don't use unknown strings as format strings
When methods or functions take a format string argument, you should make sure that you have control over the content of the format string.
For example, when logging strings, it is tempting to pass the string variable as the sole argument to NSLog:
NSString *aString = // get a string from somewhere;
NSLog(aString);
The problem with this is that the string may contain characters that are interpreted as format strings. This can lead to erroneous output, crashes, and security problems. Instead, you should substitute the string variable into a format string:
NSLog(#"%#", aString);
Use standard Cocoa naming and formatting conventions and terminology rather than whatever you're used to from another environment. There are lots of Cocoa developers out there, and when another one of them starts working with your code, it'll be much more approachable if it looks and feels similar to other Cocoa code.
Examples of what to do and what not to do:
Don't declare id m_something; in an object's interface and call it a member variable or field; use something or _something for its name and call it an instance variable.
Don't name a getter -getSomething; the proper Cocoa name is just -something.
Don't name a setter -something:; it should be -setSomething:
The method name is interspersed with the arguments and includes colons; it's -[NSObject performSelector:withObject:], not NSObject::performSelector.
Use inter-caps (CamelCase) in method names, parameters, variables, class names, etc. rather than underbars (underscores).
Class names start with an upper-case letter, variable and method names with lower-case.
Whatever else you do, don't use Win16/Win32-style Hungarian notation. Even Microsoft gave up on that with the move to the .NET platform.
IBOutlets
Historically, memory management of outlets has been poor.
Current best practice is to declare outlets as properties:
#interface MyClass :NSObject {
NSTextField *textField;
}
#property (nonatomic, retain) IBOutlet NSTextField *textField;
#end
Using properties makes the memory management semantics clear; it also provides a consistent pattern if you use instance variable synthesis.
Use the LLVM/Clang Static Analyzer
NOTE: Under Xcode 4 this is now built into the IDE.
You use the Clang Static Analyzer to -- unsurprisingly -- analyse your C and Objective-C code (no C++ yet) on Mac OS X 10.5. It's trivial to install and use:
Download the latest version from this page.
From the command-line, cd to your project directory.
Execute scan-build -k -V xcodebuild.
(There are some additional constraints etc., in particular you should analyze a project in its "Debug" configuration -- see http://clang.llvm.org/StaticAnalysisUsage.html for details -- the but that's more-or-less what it boils down to.)
The analyser then produces a set of web pages for you that shows likely memory management and other basic problems that the compiler is unable to detect.
This is subtle one but handy one. If you're passing yourself as a delegate to another object, reset that object's delegate before you dealloc.
- (void)dealloc
{
self.someObject.delegate = NULL;
self.someObject = NULL;
//
[super dealloc];
}
By doing this you're ensuring that no more delegate methods will get sent. As you're about to dealloc and disappear into the ether you want to make sure that nothing can send you any more messages by accident. Remember self.someObject could be retained by another object (it could be a singleton or on the autorelease pool or whatever) and until you tell it "stop sending me messages!", it thinks your just-about-to-be-dealloced object is fair game.
Getting into this habit will save you from lots of weird crashes that are a pain to debug.
The same principal applies to Key Value Observation, and NSNotifications too.
Edit:
Even more defensive, change:
self.someObject.delegate = NULL;
into:
if (self.someObject.delegate == self)
self.someObject.delegate = NULL;
#kendell
Instead of:
#interface MyClass (private)
- (void) someMethod
- (void) someOtherMethod
#end
Use:
#interface MyClass ()
- (void) someMethod
- (void) someOtherMethod
#end
New in Objective-C 2.0.
Class extensions are described in Apple's Objective-C 2.0 Reference.
"Class extensions allow you to declare additional required API for a class in locations other than within the primary class #interface block"
So they're part of the actual class - and NOT a (private) category in addition to the class. Subtle but important difference.
Avoid autorelease
Since you typically(1) don't have direct control over their lifetime, autoreleased objects can persist for a comparatively long time and unnecessarily increase the memory footprint of your application. Whilst on the desktop this may be of little consequence, on more constrained platforms this can be a significant issue. On all platforms, therefore, and especially on more constrained platforms, it is considered best practice to avoid using methods that would lead to autoreleased objects and instead you are encouraged to use the alloc/init pattern.
Thus, rather than:
aVariable = [AClass convenienceMethod];
where able, you should instead use:
aVariable = [[AClass alloc] init];
// do things with aVariable
[aVariable release];
When you're writing your own methods that return a newly-created object, you can take advantage of Cocoa's naming convention to flag to the receiver that it must be released by prepending the method name with "new".
Thus, instead of:
- (MyClass *)convenienceMethod {
MyClass *instance = [[[self alloc] init] autorelease];
// configure instance
return instance;
}
you could write:
- (MyClass *)newInstance {
MyClass *instance = [[self alloc] init];
// configure instance
return instance;
}
Since the method name begins with "new", consumers of your API know that they're responsible for releasing the received object (see, for example, NSObjectController's newObject method).
(1) You can take control by using your own local autorelease pools. For more on this, see Autorelease Pools.
Some of these have already been mentioned, but here's what I can think of off the top of my head:
Follow KVO naming rules. Even if you don't use KVO now, in my experience often times it's still beneficial in the future. And if you are using KVO or bindings, you need to know things are going work the way they are supposed to. This covers not just accessor methods and instance variables, but to-many relationships, validation, auto-notifying dependent keys, and so on.
Put private methods in a category. Not just the interface, but the implementation as well. It's good to have some distance conceptually between private and non-private methods. I include everything in my .m file.
Put background thread methods in a category. Same as above. I've found it's good to keep a clear conceptual barrier when you're thinking about what's on the main thread and what's not.
Use #pragma mark [section]. Usually I group by my own methods, each subclass's overrides, and any information or formal protocols. This makes it a lot easier to jump to exactly what I'm looking for. On the same topic, group similar methods (like a table view's delegate methods) together, don't just stick them anywhere.
Prefix private methods & ivars with _. I like the way it looks, and I'm less likely to use an ivar when I mean a property by accident.
Don't use mutator methods / properties in init & dealloc. I've never had anything bad happen because of it, but I can see the logic if you change the method to do something that depends on the state of your object.
Put IBOutlets in properties. I actually just read this one here, but I'm going to start doing it. Regardless of any memory benefits, it seems better stylistically (at least to me).
Avoid writing code you don't absolutely need. This really covers a lot of things, like making ivars when a #define will do, or caching an array instead of sorting it each time the data is needed. There's a lot I could say about this, but the bottom line is don't write code until you need it, or the profiler tells you to. It makes things a lot easier to maintain in the long run.
Finish what you start. Having a lot of half-finished, buggy code is the fastest way to kill a project dead. If you need a stub method that's fine, just indicate it by putting NSLog( #"stub" ) inside, or however you want to keep track of things.
Write unit tests. You can test a lot of things in Cocoa that might be harder in other frameworks. For example, with UI code, you can generally verify that things are connected as they should be and trust that they'll work when used. And you can set up state & invoke delegate methods easily to test them.
You also don't have public vs. protected vs. private method visibility getting in the way of writing tests for your internals.
Golden Rule: If you alloc then you release!
UPDATE: Unless you are using ARC
Don't write Objective-C as if it were Java/C#/C++/etc.
I once saw a team used to writing Java EE web applications try to write a Cocoa desktop application. As if it was a Java EE web application. There was a lot of AbstractFooFactory and FooFactory and IFoo and Foo flying around when all they really needed was a Foo class and possibly a Fooable protocol.
Part of ensuring you don't do this is truly understanding the differences in the language. For example, you don't need the abstract factory and factory classes above because Objective-C class methods are dispatched just as dynamically as instance methods, and can be overridden in subclasses.
Make sure you bookmark the Debugging Magic page. This should be your first stop when banging your head against a wall while trying to find the source of a Cocoa bug.
For example, it will tell you how to find the method where you first allocated memory that later is causing crashes (like during app termination).
Try to avoid what I have now decided to call Newbiecategoryaholism. When newcomers to Objective-C discover categories they often go hog wild, adding useful little categories to every class in existence ("What? i can add a method to convert a number to roman numerals to NSNumber rock on!").
Don't do this.
Your code will be more portable and easier to understand with out dozens of little category methods sprinkled on top of two dozen foundation classes.
Most of the time when you really think you need a category method to help streamline some code you'll find you never end up reusing the method.
There are other dangers too, unless you're namespacing your category methods (and who besides the utterly insane ddribin is?) there is a chance that Apple, or a plugin, or something else running in your address space will also define the same category method with the same name with a slightly different side effect....
OK. Now that you've been warned, ignore the "don't do this part". But exercise extreme restraint.
Resist subclassing the world. In Cocoa a lot is done through delegation and use of the underlying runtime that in other frameworks is done through subclassing.
For example, in Java you use instances of anonymous *Listener subclasses a lot and in .NET you use your EventArgs subclasses a lot. In Cocoa, you don't do either — the target-action is used instead.
Sort strings as the user wants
When you sort strings to present to the user, you should not use the simple compare: method. Instead, you should always use localized comparison methods such as localizedCompare: or localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare:.
For more details, see Searching, Comparing, and Sorting Strings.
Declared Properties
You should typically use the Objective-C 2.0 Declared Properties feature for all your properties. If they are not public, add them in a class extension. Using declared properties makes the memory management semantics immediately clear, and makes it easier for you to check your dealloc method -- if you group your property declarations together you can quickly scan them and compare with the implementation of your dealloc method.
You should think hard before not marking properties as 'nonatomic'. As The Objective C Programming Language Guide notes, properties are atomic by default, and incur considerable overhead. Moreover, simply making all your properties atomic does not make your application thread-safe. Also note, of course, that if you don't specify 'nonatomic' and implement your own accessor methods (rather than synthesising them), you must implement them in an atomic fashion.
Think about nil values
As this question notes, messages to nil are valid in Objective-C. Whilst this is frequently an advantage -- leading to cleaner and more natural code -- the feature can occasionally lead to peculiar and difficult-to-track-down bugs if you get a nil value when you weren't expecting it.
Use NSAssert and friends.
I use nil as valid object all the time ... especially sending messages to nil is perfectly valid in Obj-C.
However if I really want to make sure about the state of a variable, I use NSAssert and NSParameterAssert, which helps to track down problems easily.
Simple but oft-forgotten one. According to spec:
In general, methods in different
classes that have the same selector
(the same name) must also share the
same return and argument types. This
constraint is imposed by the compiler
to allow dynamic binding.
in which case all the same named selectors, even if in different classes, will be regarded as to have identical return/argument types. Here is a simple example.
#interface FooInt:NSObject{}
-(int) print;
#end
#implementation FooInt
-(int) print{
return 5;
}
#end
#interface FooFloat:NSObject{}
-(float) print;
#end
#implementation FooFloat
-(float) print{
return 3.3;
}
#end
int main (int argc, const char * argv[]) {
NSAutoreleasePool * pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
id f1=[[FooFloat alloc]init];
//prints 0, runtime considers [f1 print] to return int, as f1's type is "id" and FooInt precedes FooBar
NSLog(#"%f",[f1 print]);
FooFloat* f2=[[FooFloat alloc]init];
//prints 3.3 expectedly as the static type is FooFloat
NSLog(#"%f",[f2 print]);
[f1 release];
[f2 release]
[pool drain];
return 0;
}
If you're using Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5) or later, you can use the Instruments application to find and track memory leaks. After building your program in Xcode, select Run > Start with Performance Tool > Leaks.
Even if your app doesn't show any leaks, you may be keeping objects around too long. In Instruments, you can use the ObjectAlloc instrument for this. Select the ObjectAlloc instrument in your Instruments document, and bring up the instrument's detail (if it isn't already showing) by choosing View > Detail (it should have a check mark next to it). Under "Allocation Lifespan" in the ObjectAlloc detail, make sure you choose the radio button next to "Created & Still Living".
Now whenever you stop recording your application, selecting the ObjectAlloc tool will show you how many references there are to each still-living object in your application in the "# Net" column. Make sure you not only look at your own classes, but also the classes of your NIB files' top-level objects. For example, if you have no windows on the screen, and you see references to a still-living NSWindow, you may have not released it in your code.
Clean up in dealloc.
This is one of the easiest things to forget - esp. when coding at 150mph. Always, always, always clean up your attributes/member variables in dealloc.
I like to use Objc 2 attributes - with the new dot notation - so this makes the cleanup painless. Often as simple as:
- (void)dealloc
{
self.someAttribute = NULL;
[super dealloc];
}
This will take care of the release for you and set the attribute to NULL (which I consider defensive programming - in case another method further down in dealloc accesses the member variable again - rare but could happen).
With GC turned on in 10.5, this isn't needed so much any more - but you might still need to clean up others resources you create, you can do that in the finalize method instead.
All these comments are great, but I'm really surprised nobody mentioned Google's Objective-C Style Guide that was published a while back. I think they have done a very thorough job.
Also, semi-related topic (with room for more responses!):
What are those little Xcode tips & tricks you wish you knew about 2 years ago?.
Don't forget that NSWindowController and NSViewController will release the top-level objects of the NIB files they govern.
If you manually load a NIB file, you are responsible for releasing that NIB's top-level objects when you are done with them.
One rather obvious one for a beginner to use: utilize Xcode's auto-indentation feature for your code. Even if you are copy/pasting from another source, once you have pasted the code, you can select the entire block of code, right click on it, and then choose the option to re-indent everything within that block.
Xcode will actually parse through that section and indent it based on brackets, loops, etc. It's a lot more efficient than hitting the space bar or tab key for each and every line.
I know I overlooked this when first getting into Cocoa programming.
Make sure you understand memory management responsibilities regarding NIB files. You are responsible for releasing the top-level objects in any NIB file you load. Read Apple's Documentation on the subject.
Turn on all GCC warnings, then turn off those that are regularly caused by Apple's headers to reduce noise.
Also run Clang static analysis frequently; you can enable it for all builds via the "Run Static Analyzer" build setting.
Write unit tests and run them with each build.
Variables and properties
1/ Keeping your headers clean, hiding implementation
Don't include instance variables in your header. Private variables put into class continuation as properties. Public variables declare as public properties in your header.
If it should be only read, declare it as readonly and overwrite it as readwrite in class continutation.
Basically I am not using variables at all, only properties.
2/ Give your properties a non-default variable name, example:
#synthesize property = property_;
Reason 1: You will catch errors caused by forgetting "self." when assigning the property.
Reason 2: From my experiments, Leak Analyzer in Instruments has problems to detect leaking property with default name.
3/ Never use retain or release directly on properties (or only in very exceptional situations). In your dealloc just assign them a nil. Retain properties are meant to handle retain/release by themselves. You never know if a setter is not, for example, adding or removing observers. You should use the variable directly only inside its setter and getter.
Views
1/ Put every view definition into a xib, if you can (the exception is usually dynamic content and layer settings). It saves time (it's easier than writing code), it's easy to change and it keeps your code clean.
2/ Don't try to optimize views by decreasing the number of views. Don't create UIImageView in your code instead of xib just because you want to add subviews into it. Use UIImageView as background instead. The view framework can handle hundreds of views without problems.
3/ IBOutlets don't have to be always retained (or strong). Note that most of your IBOutlets are part of your view hierarchy and thus implicitly retained.
4/ Release all IBOutlets in viewDidUnload
5/ Call viewDidUnload from your dealloc method. It is not implicitly called.
Memory
1/ Autorelease objects when you create them. Many bugs are caused by moving your release call into one if-else branch or after a return statement. Release instead of autorelease should be used only in exceptional situations - e.g. when you are waiting for a runloop and you don't want your object to be autoreleased too early.
2/ Even if you are using Authomatic Reference Counting, you have to understand perfectly how retain-release methods work. Using retain-release manually is not more complicated than ARC, in both cases you have to thing about leaks and retain-cycles.
Consider using retain-release manually on big projects or complicated object hierarchies.
Comments
1/ Make your code autodocumented.
Every variable name and method name should tell what it is doing. If code is written correctly (you need a lot of practice in this), you won't need any code comments (not the same as documentation comments). Algorithms can be complicated but the code should be always simple.
2/ Sometimes, you'll need a comment. Usually to describe a non apparent code behavior or hack. If you feel you have to write a comment, first try to rewrite the code to be simpler and without the need of comments.
Indentation
1/ Don't increase indentation too much.
Most of your method code should be indented on the method level. Nested blocks (if, for etc.) decrease readability. If you have three nested blocks, you should try to put the inner blocks into a separate method. Four or more nested blocks should be never used.
If most of your method code is inside of an if, negate the if condition, example:
if (self) {
//... long initialization code ...
}
return self;
if (!self) {
return nil;
}
//... long initialization code ...
return self;
Understand C code, mainly C structs
Note that Obj-C is only a light OOP layer over C language. You should understand how basic code structures in C work (enums, structs, arrays, pointers etc).
Example:
view.frame = CGRectMake(view.frame.origin.x, view.frame.origin.y, view.frame.size.width, view.frame.size.height + 20);
is the same as:
CGRect frame = view.frame;
frame.size.height += 20;
view.frame = frame;
And many more
Mantain your own coding standards document and update it often. Try to learn from your bugs. Understand why a bug was created and try to avoid it using coding standards.
Our coding standards have currently about 20 pages, a mix of Java Coding Standards, Google Obj-C/C++ Standards and our own addings. Document your code, use standard standard indentation, white spaces and blank lines on the right places etc.
Be more functional.
Objective-C is object-oriented language, but Cocoa framework functional-style aware, and is designed functional style in many cases.
There is separation of mutability. Use immutable classes as primary, and mutable object as secondary. For instance, use NSArray primarily, and use NSMutableArray only when you need.
There is pure functions. Not so many, buy many of framework APIs are designed like pure function. Look at functions such as CGRectMake() or CGAffineTransformMake(). Obviously pointer form looks more efficient. However indirect argument with pointers can't offer side-effect-free. Design structures purely as much as possible.
Separate even state objects. Use -copy instead of -retain when passing a value to other object. Because shared state can influence mutation to value in other object silently. So can't be side-effect-free. If you have a value from external from object, copy it. So it's also important designing shared state as minimal as possible.
However don't be afraid of using impure functions too.
There is lazy evaluation. See something like -[UIViewController view] property. The view won't be created when the object is created. It'll be created when caller reading view property at first time. UIImage will not be loaded until it actually being drawn. There are many implementation like this design. This kind of designs are very helpful for resource management, but if you don't know the concept of lazy evaluation, it's not easy to understand behavior of them.
There is closure. Use C-blocks as much as possible. This will simplify your life greatly. But read once more about block-memory-management before using it.
There is semi-auto GC. NSAutoreleasePool. Use -autorelease primary. Use manual -retain/-release secondary when you really need. (ex: memory optimization, explicit resource deletion)