I know that our IBOutlets should be private, but for example if I have IBOutlets in TableViewCell, how should I access them from another ViewController? Here is the example why I'm asking this kind of question:
class BookTableViewCell: UITableViewCell {
#IBOutlet weak private var bookTitle: UILabel!
}
if I assign to the IBOutlet that it should be private, I got an error in another ViewController while I'm accessing the cell property: 'bookTitle' is inaccessible due to 'private' protection level
If I understand your question correctly, you are supposing the #IBOutlet properties should be marked as private all the time... Well it's not true. But also accessing the properties directly is not safe at all. You see the ViewControllers, TableViewCells and these objects use Implicit unwrapping on optional IBOutlets for reason... You don't need to init ViewController when using storyboards or just when using them somewhere in code... The other way - just imagine you are creating VC programmatically and you are passing all the labels to the initializer... It would blow your head... Instead of this, you come with this in storyboard:
#IBOutlet var myLabel: UILabel!
this is cool, you don't need to have that on init, it will just be there waiting to be set somewhere before accessing it's value... Interface builder will handle for you the initialization just before ViewDidLoad, so the label won't be nil after that time... again before AwakeFromNib method goes in the UITableViewCell subclass, when you would try to access your bookTitle label property, it would crash since it would be nil... This is the tricky part about why this should be private... Otherwise when you know that the VC is 100% on the scene allocated there's no need to be shy and make everything private...
When you for example work in prepare(for segue:) method, you SHOULD NEVER ACCESS THE #IBOutlets. Since they are not allocated and even if they were, they would get overwritten by some internal calls in push/present/ whatever functions...
Okay that's cool.. so what to do now?
When using UITableViewCell subclass, you can safely access the IBOutlets (ONLY IF YOU USE STORYBOARD AND THE CELL IS WITHIN YOUR TABLEVIEW❗️)
and change their values... you see
func tableView(_ tableView: UITableView, cellForRowAt indexPath: IndexPath) -> UITableViewCell {
// We shouldn't return just some constructor with UITableViewCell, but who cares for this purposes...
guard let cell = tableView.dequeueReusableCell(withIdentifier: "bookTableViewCell", for: indexPath) else { return UITableViewCell() }
cell.bookTitle.text = "any given text" // This should work ok because of interface builder...
}
The above case should work in MVC pattern, not MVVM or other patterns where you don't use storyboards with tableViewControllers and embed cells too much... (because of registering cells, but that's other article...)
I will give you few pointers, how you can setup the values in the cell/ViewController without touching the actual values and make this safe... Also good practice (safety) is to make the IBOutlets optional to be 100% Safe, but it's not necessary and honestly it would be strange approach to this problem:
ViewControllers:
class SomeVC: UIViewController {
// This solution should be effective when those labels could be marked weak too...
// Always access weak variables NOT DIRECTLY but with safe unwrap...
#IBOutlet var titleLabel: UILabel?
#IBOutlet var subtitleLabel: UILabel?
var myCustomTitle: String?
var myCustomSubtitle: String?
func setup(with dataSource: SomeVCDataSource ) {
guard let titleLabel = titleLabel, let subtitleLabel = subtitleLabel else { return }
// Now the values are safely unwrapped and nothing can crash...
titleLabel.text = dataSource.title
subtitleLabel.text = dataSource.subtitle
}
// WHen using prepare for segue, use this:
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
titleLabel.text = myCustomTitle
subtitleLabel.text = myCustomSubtitle
}
}
struct SomeVCDataSource {
var title: String
var subtitle: String
}
The next problem could be this:
override func prepare(for segue: UIStoryboardSegue, sender: Any?) {
guard let destinationVC = segue.destination as? SomeVC else { return }
let datasource = SomeVCDataSource(title: "Foo", subtitle: "Bar")
// This sets up cool labels... but the labels are Nil before the segue occurs and even after that, so the guard in setup(with dataSource:) will fail and return...
destinationVC.setup(with: datasource)
// So instead of this you should set the properties myCustomTitle and myCustomSubtitle to values you want and then in viewDidLoad set the values
destinationVC.myCustomTitle = "Foo"
destinationVC.myCustomSubtitle = "Bar"
}
You see, you don' need to set your IBOutlets to private since you never know how you will use them If you need any more examples or something is not clear to you, ask as you want... Wish you happy coding and deep learning!
You should expose only what you need.
For example you can set and get only the text property in the cell.
class BookTableViewCell: UITableViewCell {
#IBOutlet weak private var bookTitleLabel: UILabel!
var bookTitle: String? {
set {
bookTitleLabel.text = newValue
}
get {
return bookTitleLabel.text
}
}
}
And then, wherever you need:
cell.bookTitle = "It"
Now outer objects do not have access to bookTitleLabel but are able to change it's text content.
What i usually do is configure method which receives data object and privately sets all it's outlets features.
I haven't come across making IBOutlets private to be common, for cells at least. If you want to do so, provide a configure method within your cell that is not private, which you can pass values to, that you want to assign to your outlets. The function within your cell could look like this:
func configure(with bookTitle: String) {
bookTitle.text = bookTitle
}
EDIT: Such a function can be useful for the future, when you change your cell and add new outlets. You can then add parameters to your configure function to handle those. You will get compiler errors everywhere, where you use that function, which allows you to setup your cell correctly wherever you use it. That is helpful in a big project that reuses cells in different places.
Related
A nib has been loaded manually via UINib(nibName, bundle).instantiate().
The outlets connecting the nib to a UIView subclass are being successfully initialized and are accessible.
Two of these outlets represent a UILabel and a UITextView - which are being used to present attributed text strings.
Changes to the attributed strings are being performed on mutable copies before replacement via the .attribtedText setter method.
Everything works as expected whenever functions intended to update the attributed text are called either directly in the UIView subclass or the View Controller that loads the nib.
However, when the same function is called via a reference kept inside some other class object elsewhere in the codebase, the updates don't happen.
The Nib's UIView subclass:
class MyView: UIView {
#IBOutlet weak var aLabel: UILabel!
#IBOutlet weak var someText: UITextView!
...
public func applySomeStyle() {
guard
let aLabelMAS = aLabel.attributedText?.mutableCopy() as? NSMutableAttributedString,
var someTextMAS = someText.attributedText.mutableCopy() as? NSMutableAttributedString
else {
return
}
let labelRange = NSRange(location: 0, length: aLabelMAS.length)
aLabelMAS.addAttribute(.backgroundColor, value: UIColor.yellow, range: labelRange)
let someTextRange = NSRange(location: 0, length: someTextMAS.length)
someTextMAS.removeAttribute(.backgroundColor, range: someTextRange)
aLabel.attributedText = aLabelMAS
someText.attributedText = someTextMAS
}
public func doStuff() {
...
applySomeStyle() // No problems -- the attributed strings inside the UILabel and UITextView are updated as intended.
...
}
}
From inside the ViewController that loads the Nib, calls to the applySomeStyle function via the reference to the MyView object work fine.
class MyViewController: UIViewController {
weak var myView: MyView!
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
...
myView = UINib(nibName: "MyView", bundle: Bundle.main).instantiate(
withOwner: self, options: nil).first as? MyView
self.view.addSubview(myView)
...
}
override func viewDidLayoutSubviews() {
super.viewDidLayoutSubviews()
myView.applySomeStyle() // Again, no problems.
}
}
But if the nib class object is referenced elsewhere -- the changes don't occur.
class SomeOtherViewController: UIViewController
var myVC: MyViewController!
...
func foo() {
myVC.myView.applySomeStyle() // Fails to update the UILabel/UITextView
}
...
}
Executing the attributedText setter, i.e.
someText.attributedText = someNewAttributedString
triggers viewDidLayoutSubviews().
Inside viewDidLayoutSubviews(), I was calling a function (e.g. a 'load content' function) that was also responsible for setting some string attributes. I was using a boolean flag to ensure that subsequent calls to viewDidLayoutSubviews weren't going to trigger that function again.
In this case, that boolean condition was not working as it was intended to, and so other functions that set the attributedText property were leading it to be triggered again, overwriting the changes made by other functions.
I thought I was dealing with an obscure bug.
I thought maybe it was a thread issue.
I thought maybe it was a broken reference of some kind.
I thought wrong.
But I hope that this proves useful to someone out there.
In my AppDelegate's applicationDidFinishLaunching I need to create an object using data read from disk, and then pass this object to the initial view controller for display. What would be the best way to do this?
Right now I'm loading the storyboard programatically like so:
func applicationDidFinishLaunching(_ aNotification: Notification) {
importantThing = ImportantThing()
importantThing.load(url: URL(fileURLWithPath: "..."))
let storyboard = NSStoryboard(name: "Main", bundle: nil)
myWindowController = storyboard.instantiateController(withIdentifier: "MyWindowController") as! NSWindowController
(myWindowController.contentViewController as? MyViewController)?.importantThing = importantThing
myWindowController.showWindow(self)
}
But this feels clunky. For one, the property is being set after viewDidLoad, so now view setup is weird.
There must be a better way to do this. If possible, I would like to not resort to using a singleton, because I actually need to set up a few interconnected objects (two objects with important state that have references to each other, but it doesn't make sense for either to contain the other). What would be a good way to solve this?
What you're doing in the app delegate is correct. As for what you should do in the view controller, Apple's Master-Detail app template shows you the correct pattern (I've added a few comments):
// the interface
#IBOutlet weak var detailDescriptionLabel: UILabel!
// the property
var detailItem: NSDate? {
didSet {
self.configureView()
}
}
func configureView() {
// check _both_ the property _and_ the interface
if let detail = self.detailItem { // property set?
if let label = self.detailDescriptionLabel { // interface exists?
label.text = detail.description
}
}
}
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
// at this point, its _certain_ that the interface exists
self.configureView()
}
If you think about it, you'll see that the interface is updated correctly regardless of the order of events — that is, regardless of whether viewDidLoad or the setting of the property comes first. Just follow that pattern.
I'm trying to do something that should be very simple, but I'm having issues due to my inexperience with Swift.
I have a ViewController that has a TableView inside of it with custom cells that are populated from an array of objects (called allListItems). These objects were created using Realm Model Object, which I'm using instead of Core Data, which I think might be pertinent. Each custom cell has a UISwitch in it, and ideally I'd like to set it up so that when the user toggles the UISwitch, it modifies the boolean isSelected property for that indexPath.row, and then appends that object to a separate array, called selectedListItems.
All of my searching through SO, Tuts+, and AppCoda has revealed that I should be using a protocol - delegate pattern here, with my protocol in my custom cell class and my delegate in my ViewController class. After flailing away at it for most of the day I haven't had any luck, however, which I think might be due to the arrays being Realm Model Objects.
As I mentioned, I'm very new to Swift and programming in general, so ELI5 responses are much appreciated! Thanks in advance!
For reference, here is my custom cell:
import UIKit
class AllListItemsTableViewCell: UITableViewCell {
#IBOutlet var toggleIsSelected: UISwitch!
#IBOutlet var listItemLabel: UILabel!
override func awakeFromNib() {
super.awakeFromNib()
// Initialization code
}
override func setSelected(selected: Bool, animated: Bool) {
super.setSelected(selected, animated: animated)
// Configure the view for the selected state
}
}
Instead of the suggested protocol / delegate pattern use a callback.
This is very easy in Swift.
In the table view cell declare a optional variable with a closure
var callback : ((UITableViewCell, Bool) -> Void)?
and call it in the IBAction for the switch
#IBAction func switchChanged(sender : UISwitch) {
callback?(self, sender.on)
}
In cellForRowAtIndexPath set the callback
cell.callback = { (tableViewCell, switchState) in
if let indexPath = self.tableView.indexPathForCell(tableViewCell) {
// do something with index path and switch state
}
}
To pass the cell back can be useful if the cell was moved meanwhile to get the most recent index path.
I am trying to build an NSCollectionView filled with multiple editable TextViews. (OS X app in Swift.) My subclass of NSCollectionViewItem is called NoteViewItem. I am trying to have the program detect when one of the TextView has changed. I tried using both controlTextDidChange and textDidChange in the NoteViewItem's delegate with test print statement to see which would work. ControlTextDidChange did nothing; textDidChange recognized a change happened, so I went with that.
The problem is that textDidChange appears to point to a different NoteViewItem than the one that was shown on screen in the first place. It wasn't able to recognize the variable (called theNote) set in the original NoteViewItem; when I ask NoteViewItem to print String(self), I get two different results, one while setting the initial text and one in textDidChange. I'm wondering if I've set up my delegates and outlets wrongly. Any thoughts on why my references are off here?
Here's my code for NoteViewItem:
import Cocoa
class NoteViewItem: NSCollectionViewItem, NSTextViewDelegate
{
// MARK: Variables
#IBOutlet weak var theLabel: NSTextField!
#IBOutlet var theTextView: NSTextView!
var theNote: Note?
{
didSet
{
// Pre: The NoteViewItem's theNote property is set.
// Post: This observer has set the content of the *item's text view*, and label if it has one.
guard viewLoaded else { return }
if let theNote = theNote
{
// textField?.stringValue = theNote.noteText
theLabel.stringValue = theNote.filename
theTextView.string = theNote.noteText
theTextView.display()
print("theTextView.string set to "+theTextView.string!+" in NoteViewItem "+String(self))
}
else
{
theLabel.stringValue = "Empty note?"
}
}
}
// MARK: Functions
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
// Do view setup here.
// Hopefully this will set the note's background to white.
view.wantsLayer = true
view.layer?.backgroundColor = NSColor.whiteColor().CGColor
}
// MARK: - NSTextViewDelegate
/*
override func controlTextDidChange(notification: NSNotification)
{
print("Control text changed.")
}
*/
func textDidChange(notification: NSNotification)
{
if let noteyMcNoteface = theNote
{
print("On edit, we have a note: "+String(noteyMcNoteface))
}
else
{
print("On edit, we have no note. I am NoteViewItem "+String(self))
}
}
}
I figured it out. My delegate, in the TextView, was connected to the wrong object in the Interface Builder for NoteViewItem.xib. I had connected it to the object labelled Note View Item, under objects in the outline. It should have been connected to File's Owner instead, since File's Owner stands for the NoteViewItem.swift class associated with the xib.
You'd think that if you want to connect the delegate to the NoteViewItem class and there is exactly one Note View Item listed in the outline, then that Note View Item is the thing you want to connect it to. Nope, you connect it to something entirely different that isn't called the Note View Item but is the Note View Item. I'm glad Interface Builder makes things so simple.
I'm trying to enable or disable an #IBOutlet UIButton Item of a toolbar from a UIView.
The button should get disabled when the array that I'm using in EraseView.Swift is empty.
I tried creating an instance of the view controller but it gives me the error (found nil while unwrapping):
in EraseView:
class EraseView: UIView {
...
let editViewController = EditImageViewController()
//array has item
editViewController.undoEraseButton.enabled = true //here I get the error
...
}
I tried to put a global Bool that changed the value using it in EditImageViewController but it doesn't work:
var enableUndoButton = false
class EditImageViewController: UIViewController {
#IBOutlet weak var undoEraseButton: UIBarButtonItem!
viewDidLoad() {
undoEraseButton.enabled = enableUndoButton
}
}
class EraseView: UIView {
...
//array has item
enableUndoButton = true //here I get the error
...
}
I know it's simple but I can't let it work. Here's the situation:
The root of the problem is the line that says:
let editViewController = EditImageViewController()
The EditImageViewController() says "ignore what the storyboard has already instantiated for me, but rather instantiate another view controller with no outlets hooked up and use that." Clearly, that's not what you want.
You need to provide some way for the EraseView to inform the existing view controller whether there was some change to its "is empty" state. And, ideally, you want to do this in a way that keeps these two classes loosely coupled. The EraseView should only be informing the view controller of the change of the "is empty" state, and the view controller should initiate the updating of the other subviews (i.e. the button). A view really shouldn't be updating another view's outlets.
There are two ways you might do that:
Closure:
You can give the EraseView a optional closure that it will call when it toggles from "empty" and "not empty":
var emptyStateChanged: ((Bool) -> ())?
Then it can call this when the state changes. E.g., when you delete the last item in the view, the EraseView can call that closure:
emptyStateChanged?(true)
Finally, for that to actually do anything, the view controller should supply the actual closure to enable and disable the button upon the state change:
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
eraseView.emptyStateChanged = { [unowned self] isEmpty in
self.undoEraseButton.enabled = !isEmpty
}
}
Note, I used unowned to avoid strong reference cycle.
Delegate-protocol pattern:
So you might define a protocol to do that:
protocol EraseViewDelegate : class {
func eraseViewIsEmpty(empty: Bool)
}
Then give the EraseView a delegate property:
weak var delegate: EraseViewDelegate?
Note, that's weak to avoid strong reference cycles. (And that's also why I defined the protocol to be a class protocol, so that I could make it weak here.)
The EraseView would then call this delegate when the the view's "is empty" status changes. For example, when it becomes empty, it would inform its delegate accordingly:
delegate?.eraseViewIsEmpty(true)
Then, again, for this all to work, the view controller should (a) declare that is conforms to the protocol; (b) specify itself as the delegate of the EraseView; and (c) implement the eraseViewIsEmpty method, e.g.:
class EditImageViewController: UIViewController, EraseViewDelegate {
#IBOutlet weak var undoEraseButton: UIBarButtonItem!
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
eraseView.delegate = self
}
func eraseViewIsEmpty(empty: Bool) {
undoEraseButton.enabled = !empty
}
}
Both of these patterns keep the two classes loosely coupled, but allow the EraseView to inform its view controller of some event. It also eliminates the need for any global.
There are other approaches that could solve this problem, too, (e.g. notifications, KVN, etc.) but hopefully this illustrates the basic idea. Views should inform their view controller of any key events, and the view controller should take care of the updating of the other views.