In my code I have many pushViewController() (with instantiateViewController() and other stuff) methods in one ViewController. I am just thinking how I can avoid repeating on this chunk of code and make it more clear and dry.
I have found protocol solution here https://stackoverflow.com/a/43124539/6866265
It looks nice but I would like to see other options.
Thanks
Related
I am writing my main manager script for my game. I seems like the script handles 10+ huge if..else..if..else statements. It looks messy and hard to manage. And in monodevelop I am not able to minimise particular parts of code like we can do in eclipse.
I am considering of creating individual script for each part and enable-access-disable it from a common script.
Please direct me to the better ways to do?
In the best case every method or class should have one responsibility, and only one.
Try to extract duplicate code into methods
Try to split up your classes, so that each class does only one thing
Advanced: organize your classes in layers (Model-View-Control) and only talk to other classes through interfaces
share some code structure. it is a good practice to encapsulate blocks of code that perform a particular task into functions that accept parameters,
eg ( myFunction(param1, param2, param3){} )
if you ever have to reuse the code block you merely call the function and have it return the necessary values.
So - I am really really digging coffeescript. But, I am curious how the possibility of repetition of code is dealth with across a large repository of code.
For instance.
Lets say I create a simple class.
class Cart
constructor: (#session, #group) ->
class Shoes extends Cart
compiler will create __extends and __hasProp methods.
Mind you, this is just one example -- pretty much this happens with loops etc... So, granted each bit of code is usually in its walled garden.. BUT, there could be many many of the same methods thru-out a code base.... because of the compiler just creating generic helper methods that are all the same.
Anyone else have to contend with this or deal with that possible bloat?
That is probably a lot more specific to what build tool you are using to manage a large codebase. grunt-contrib-coffee for example provides the ability to concatenate before compilation which means something like the __extends method should only get declared once. Likewise, I believe, asset pipeline in rails makes similar optimizations through the require statements.
I've been working with layers for MapKit on the iPhone, and one library that I came across was this one: https://github.com/mtigas/iOS-MapLayerDemo/. It's very helpful, and seems to work fine. However, I'm trying to go through and understand a bit how it works, but I'm having some trouble.
On this page, for example: https://github.com/mtigas/iOS-MapLayerDemo/blob/master/MapLayerDemo/Classes/CustomOverlayView.m,
at the top, there are 4 custom functions defined. I assume these functions are adding on to the normal features of MKOverlayView? The thing is, I can't find where any of these new functions are actually called from, and thus I'm having some trouble understanding how this page works. It doesn't seem to be from any of the other files within the project.
I appreciate any help, thanks.
After some extended discussion with you in comments:
The override-able functions of MKOverlayView, such as canDrawMapRect cannot easily be traced back to their calling code because that code is obfuscated somewhere in the MapKit.framework.
Instead, the typical approach is to re-read their documentation until you get a mental picture of what the framework is using the function for. (There is such a thing as decompiling binaries, although that is generally frowned upon and I do not recommend it.)
canDrawMapRect documentation: http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/MapKit/Reference/MKOverlayView_class/Reference/Reference.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40009715-CH1-SW10
After reading their documentation, I inferred this: Somewhere in the MapKit.framework, canDrawMapRect is being called prior to actually drawing the view. If you didn't override that function in your subclass, it calls the super-class's default implementation, which always returns YES and then calls drawMapRect: (Which MUST be overridden if you are subclassing MKOverlayView, or else nothing will draw!)
The class you linked above potentially returns NO. In that particular case, it appears the code in MapKit.framework skips calling drawMapRect: and nothing is displayed (or refreshed).
So, long story short: for this case, you have to play code-detective and hope the documentation is written clearly enough to figure it out without being able to see all of the code.
Edit: Just to further clarify - It appears MKOverlayView must be subclassed to actually generate something visible.
My original answer before getting to your underlying question --
Short answer: Those are private functions for use within that class.
Long answer: Functions declared in an empty-name category at the top
of implementation files are visible only to the class the category is
extending. Thus, those functions can only be called within that
class's implementation. (C++ equivalent would just be declaring the
functions private)
3 of those 4 functions are called within that same .m file. Without
digging around, I'm guessing they wrote the first function and then
later decided to not use it.
When I work with UITableViewControllers - especially when using NSFetchedResultsController - I find myself repeating a lot of base functionality on every controller. Which I hate. I'd much rather love to write these methods once and keep it all neat and tidy.
So I was wondering: What do you guys do to not repeat yourself writing UIViewControllers. How do you DRY up your code. Inheritance, protocols, whatever.
Thanks! Looking forward to your answers.
(Since this question doesn't have a definitive answer, I will accept the one I find the best.
Is that the way to do it?)
You can write your own controllers with the basic functionality and then subclass and reuse them. Check the CoreDataTableViewController class that was built for the Stanford iPhone Application Development course -> http://www.stanford.edu/class/cs193p/cgi-bin/drupal/node/167
One technique is to subclass your own subclass. This, modularizes and isolates the differences nicely, however it generates a lot of classes and files, which some find harder to read.
Another technique, which you can use when you want to create a bunch of almost identical controllers with just slight differences, is to give one class a "type" parameter or instance variable. Set the controller's type when you init a controller, and use the controller's type in "if" or switch statements (etc.) to select between slight differences in controller behaviors at run-time. This can help keep all the differences more compactly located in source code.
I made this new Core Data wrapper for iOS in Swift - https://github.com/tadija/AERecord
It has Swift version of CoreDataTableViewController, and CoreDataCollectionViewController also.
Beside that you can use it to setup Core Data stack like this:
AERecord.setupCoreDataStack()
Access context for current thread like this:
AERecord.defaultContext
Save context like this:
AERecord.saveContext()
Create fetch requests like this:
NSManagedObject.create()
NSManagedObject.firstOrCreateWithAttribute("city", value: "Belgrade")
NSManagedObject.deleteAll()
let predicate = ...
NSManagedObject.firstWithPredicate(predicate)
NSManagedObject.allWithAttribute("year", value: 1984)
And much more... I hope it will be useful for someone.
Currently I am making some decisions for my first objective-c API. Nothing big, just a little help for myself to get things done faster in the future.
After reading a few hours about different patterns like making categories, singletons, and so on, I came accross something that I like because it seems easy to maintain for me. I'm making a set of useful functions, that can be useful everywhere.
So what I did is:
1) I created two new files (.h, .m), and gave the "class" a name: SLUtilsMath, SLUtilsGraphics, SLUtilsSound, and so on. I think of that as kind of "namespace", so all those things will always be called SLUtils******. I added all of them into a Group SL, which contains a subgroup SLUtils.
2) Then I just put my functions signatures in the .h file, and the implementations of the functions in the .m file. And guess what: It works!! I'm happy with it, and it's easy to use. The only nasty thing about it is, that I have to include the appropriate header every time I need it. But that's okay, since that's normal. I could include it in the header prefix pch file, though.
But then, I went to toilet and a ghost came out there, saying: "Hey! Isn't it better to make real methods, instead of functions? Shouldn't you make class methods, so that you have to call a method rather than a function? Isn't that much cooler and doesn't it have a better performance?" Well, for readability I prefer the functions. On the other hand they don't have this kind of "named parameters" like methods, a.f.a.i.k..
So what would you prefer in that case?
Of course I dont want to allocate an object before using a useful method or function. That would be harrying.
Maybe the toilet ghost was right. There IS a cooler way. Well, for me, personally, this is great:
MYNAMESPACECoolMath.h
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#interface MYNAMESPACECoolMath : NSObject {
}
+ (float)randomizeValue:(float)value byPercent:(float)percent;
+ (float)calculateHorizontalGravity:(CGPoint)p1 andPoint:(CGPoint)p2;
// and some more
#end
Then in code, I would just import that MYNAMESPACECoolMath.h and just call:
CGFloat myValue = [MYNAMESPACECoolMath randomizeValue:10.0f byPercent:5.0f];
with no nasty instantiation, initialization, allocation, what ever. For me that pattern looks like a static method in java, which is pretty nice and easy to use.
The advantage over a function, is, as far as I noticed, the better readability in code. When looking at a CGRectMake(10.0f, 42.5f, 44.2f, 99.11f) you'll may have to look up what those parameters stand for, if you're not so familiar with it. But when you have a method call with "named" parameters, then you see immediately what the parameter is.
I think I missed the point what makes a big difference to a singleton class when it comes to simple useful methods / functions that can be needed everywhere. Making special kind of random values don't belong to anything, it's global. Like grass. Like trees. Like air. Everyone needs it.
Performance-wise, a static method in a static class compile to almost the same thing as a function.
Any real performance hits you'd incur would be in object instantiation, which you said you'd want to avoid, so that should not be an issue.
As far as preference or readability, there is a trend to use static methods more than necessary because people are viewing Obj-C is an "OO-only" language, like Java or C#. In that paradigm, (almost) everything must belong to a class, so class methods are the norm. In fact, they may even call them functions. The two terms are interchangeable there. However, this is purely convention. Convention may even be too strong of a word. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using functions in their place and it is probably more appropriate if there are no class members (even static ones) that are needed to assist in the processing of those methods/functions.
The problem with your approach is the "util" nature of it. Almost anything with the word "util" it in suggests that you have created a dumping ground for things you don't know where to fit into your object model. That probably means that your object model is not in alignment with your problem space.
Rather than working out how to package up utility functions, you should be thinking about what model objects these functions should be acting upon and then put them on those classes (creating the classes if needed).
To Josh's point, while there is nothing wrong with functions in ObjC, it is a very strongly object-oriented language, based directly on the grand-daddy of object-oriented languages, Smalltalk. You should not abandon the OOP patterns lightly; they are the heart of Cocoa.
I create private helper functions all the time, and I create public convenience functions for some objects (NSLocalizedString() is a good example of this). But if you're creating public utility functions that aren't front-ends to methods, you should be rethinking your patterns. And the first warning sign is the desire to put the word "util" in a file name.
EDIT
Based on the particular methods you added to your question, what you should be looking at are Categories. For instance, +randomizeValue:byPercent: is a perfectly good NSNumber category:
// NSNumber+SLExtensions.h
- (double)randomizeByPercent:(CGFloat)percent;
+ (double)randomDoubleNear:(CGFloat)percent byPercent:(double)number;
+ (NSNumber *)randomNumberNear:(CGFloat)percent byPercent:(double)number;
// Some other file that wants to use this
#import "NSNumber+SLExtensions.h"
randomDouble = [aNumber randomizeByPercent:5.0];
randomDouble = [NSNumber randomDoubleNear:5.0 byPercent:7.0];
If you get a lot of these, then you may want to split them up into categories like NSNumber+Random. Doing it with Categories makes it transparently part of the existing object model, though, rather than creating classes whose only purpose is to work on other objects.
You can use a singleton instance instead if you want to avoid instantiating a bunch of utility objects.
There's nothing wrong with using plain C functions, though. Just know that you won't be able to pass them around using #selector for things like performSelectorOnMainThread.
When it comes to performance of methods vs. functions, Mike Ash has some great numbers in his post "Performance Comparisons of Common Operations". Objective-C message send operations are extremely fast, so much so that you'd have to have a really tight computational loop to even see the difference. I think that using functions vs. methods in your approach will come down to the stylistic design issues that others have described.
Optimise the system, not the function calls.
Implement what is easiest to understand and then when the whole system works, profile it and speed up what's slow. I doubt very much that the objective-c runtime overhead of a static class is going to matter one bit to your whole app.