I've got two view controllers that have some similar function. Some of them are IBActions. Is there a way to put them together(so that it's easier to fix bugs)? I've tried inheritance but it seems that it does not work.
#implementation ClassA
-(IBAction)f
{
//some code here
}
#implementation ClassB
-(IBAction)f
{
//some code here
}
My question is that is there a way that I write function f once? If there is a bug, I could fix it more quickly this way.
in inheritence, you can just declare in parent class, like abstract function, and for each child defination will be separte, now you have to do is this
make a method in parent class that performs the logic only,
make two ibactionn methods both in childs and perform the current child's UI tasks in that methods and use the parent's logic method, that u created above, to get the data.
inform if you get soltion or not.
Make a method that does the job and call it either from the IBAction or wherever you need it.
You can make utility kind of class where you can make class method for this.
And you can call this method where needed.
You Can make another singleton class or utility class as per your requirement. And make class method, for common functionality. So u can use this functionality any where from project.
Its good practice to make utility class or singleton class for some common functionalities.
Related
In Dart every method gets override. In our business logic we don't need our this function will never override by its child classes so how can we make function
No.
Dart has no way to make a virtual method final/non-overridable.
Further, all classes introduce an interface, so someone can implement the same interface without even extending the original class.
Delegation is a new concept for me. To my understanding, it asks someone else to do some job for me. I then, delegate some tasks to him.
class Vehicle {
var numberOfWheels = 0
var description: String {
return "\(numberOfWheels) wheel(s)"
}
}
class Bicycle: Vehicle {
override init() {
super.init() //# Delegate up
numberOfWheels = 2
}
}
The code super.init() is a delegate up action in class initialization. The subclass initializer calls the initializer of the superclass first. The superclass' default initializer assigning the integer 0 to the variable numberOfWheels. This is Phase one initialization. After that, the overriding action of the subclass' initializer further customizes the variable by numberOfWheels = 2.
Question Is there any incorrectness of my understanding? and I hope the delegate up description I'm used here is correct.
Please correct any error and misunderstandings I have it here. Thanks
What you are depicting here has nothing to do with delegation-pattern at all, it's the concept of inheritance. Your bicycle class is inheriting from Vehicle. Vehicle has already implemented some code, so instead of writing it again you can use the code of the super-class (the class that is inherited from). Your super-class doesn't have a defined initializer, therefore the super.init() wont even do anything. You should read about inheritance and try to understand this concept better.
Here's what delegation does: You are right about the idea of delegation. It allows you to "outsource" some work to another class. This can be achieved with protocols. A delegate has to conform a delegation protocol to ensure that it has the methods you want to call on it. You are using protocols instead of inherited classes here, because you don't care about the implementation of the specific methods, you just want to tell your delegate to handle a situation, it's up to the delegate to know what to do.
Delegation is most commonly used in MVC applications for macOS and iOS. You can read more about delegation in the Apple Documentation. There are also dozens of tutorials like this one on the internet that show how delegation works in practice.
I have created a class which contain only static method in iPhone. The class was mainly to do my core data operations. But suddenly, I had a need to make a method call in a view controller, when an insertion of data in to a table got completed.
At first, I decided to send an NSNotification, once the loop finishes iteration. But then, since I need to use this only for single time, I decided not to go for NSNotificationCenter, instead to use delegation.
Now I have many static method, and two instance methods:
//1
-(id)initWithDelegate:(id)delegate;
//2
-(void)insertContentsInToTheTableFromArray:(NSArray *)contentArray;
Is this a good design pattern, to have both instance methods and class methods in this class. Please share your thoughts.
We can use both method in one class. We know that instance methods use an instance of a class, whereas a static method can be used with just the class name. But the static method is a convenience method that use on many foundation classes.
I have two classes, both are subclasses of CCLayer,
I want to call a method of first class into second class, what should I code?
Your question is not providing much detail, but from my understanding of what you say, you need the following:
a selector in the public interface of your first class;
a pointer ivar in the second class that you will properly initialize so that it points to an instance of the first class;
In this way you will be able to call the first class' method from the second class.
I have a class which is intended to be abstract. This means: When someone subclasses it, a few methods MUST be overwritten.
But on the other hand, those methods are not intended to be called manually from anywhere except inside the abstract class (the superclass of the subclass).
Must I declare these methods in .h anyways or can I just add comments in .h which say "you must overwrite -foo and -bar"? Or is there a better pattern to make abstract methods?
Related: Is there a way to create an abstract class in Objective C?
Objective-C doesn't actually have a way to declare a class as abstract. From Apple's Docs:
Abstract Classes
Some classes are designed only or
primarily so that other classes can
inherit from them. These abstract
classes group methods and instance
variables that can be used by a number
of different subclasses into a common
definition. The abstract class is
typically incomplete by itself, but
contains useful code that reduces the
implementation burden of its
subclasses. (Because abstract classes
must have subclasses to be useful,
they’re sometimes also called abstract
superclasses.)
Unlike some other languages,
Objective-C does not have syntax to
mark classes as abstract, nor does it
prevent you from creating an instance
of an abstract class.
The NSObject class is the canonical
example of an abstract class in Cocoa.
You never use instances of the
NSObject class in an application—it
wouldn’t be good for anything; it
would be a generic object with the
ability to do nothing in particular.
The NSView class, on the other hand,
provides an example of an abstract
class instances of which you might
occasionally use directly.
Abstract classes often contain code
that helps define the structure of an
application. When you create
subclasses of these classes, instances
of your new classes fit effortlessly
into the application structure and
work automatically with other objects.
So to answer your question, yes, you need to place the method signature in the header, and should implement the method in the base class such that it generates an error if called, like the related question's answer states.
You can also use a protocol to force classes to implement certain methods.
However you choose to implement the base class, clearly document in the header, as well as in your documentation, exactly what the class assumes and how to go about sub-classing it correctly.
Whenever possible write your code so that improper implementations fail to compile. If you cannot do that then you should try to generate a runtime error (at the very least in a debug build) if the subclass is not written correctly. Do not rely on comments because people will not read them.
You must declare your "protected" and "abstract" methods in a header file, but you can use separate categories to clearly indicate their purpose and intended use.
#interface MyBaseClass : NSObject {
}
- (void)foo;
#end
#interface MyBaseClass(ProtectedMethods)
- (void)bar;
#end
#interface MyBaseClass(AbstractMethods) // Subclasses must implement
- (void)internalBar;
#end
You can put everything in a single header, or you could put your protected and abstract declarations in a separate "protected" header, say MyClassProtected.h, meant to be included only by your subclass implementations. It depends on how badly you want "hide" your protected methods.
Your base class can log, assert, or throw when an abstract/pure-virtual method is called.
As other people have said, Objective-C does not support pure virtual classes.
You can enforce pure virtual behaviour at runtime though. The cleanest way to do this is by using the Objective-C runtime's _cmd and NSObject's -doesNotRecognizeSelector:
- (void)iMustBeImplementedInaSubclass;
{
[self doesNotRecognizeSelector:_cmd]; // Pure virtual
}
As ben says you are probably better served by using a protocol to get your API design right.