Is it necessary to create a separate view class when using MVC? - iphone

After watching the Stanford iTunesU CS193p online course I have quick question regarding the correct way to implement an MVC design.
Usually when I do an application I set my view up as part of the controller and add UIButtons, UILabels etc. to that. Essentially the controller and the view become one, unless you count the UIObjects as being the view objects
In one of the early CS193p examples the tutor splits the view off from the controller as a separate object (subclassing UIView), before implementing a protocol and delegate property on the view which the controller object then conforms to.
I am just curious about the practicality of the CS193p design, I can understand that splitting off the view better represents the MVC design paradigm (especially as a teaching aid) but slightly sceptical of its application in real world applications.

Think about the "view" as objects such as UIButton and UIImageView; re-usable components that don't necessarily know anything about the rest of your application. Your view controller is the object responsible for configuring the view objects and managing their state.
There are times when you'll want to subclass UIView, mostly when you need to do custom drawing in drawRect:. You wouldn't subclass UIView to customize behavior though, that's what your view controller is for. For example, you wouldn't subclass UITableView and just to make the table view its own delegate. Instead you'd make your view controller the table view's delegate.

With iOS, the UIView class implements drawing refresh and touch handlers, not the view controller class. If you need drawRect: or touchesBegan:, etc., you will need a separate UIView subclass.
This partially could be because this is how buttons and labels themselves behave as well. They redraw themselves, and delegate processed touches. The view controller doesn't draw their content and track xy locations.

It's not strictly necessary. If you use Interface Builder, most of the reasons why you would build a custom view (breaking UI setup code out of your business code) are taken care of. However, if you want to build custom actions to your view, or setup some properties that you can't quite get at with IB, then it would make sense to split off your view into a separate class.

Related

When to subclass UIViewController for custom subview?

I've seen custom subviews implemented as an UIViewController subclass, but that maybe could have been implemented as an UIView subclass.
When should I subclass UIViewController instead of UIView for a subview? Are there any drawbacks to subclassing UIViewController?
Personally, when I need some significant logic to go on, I do it with a UIViewController subclass. Also, if I am looking for some of the behavior that you get from UIViewController e.g. presenting it modally or in a navigation controller.
If you are doing something fairly simple or lightweight, a UIView subclass is usually enough. I seem to have used them most often when making custom buttons and table view cells.
In my experience I have found myself using more UIViewController subclasses than UIView subclasses, but this might not be the best, it just so happens that I feel a bit more comfortable using view controllers rather than straight-up views.
Take a look at what Apple has to say on Controller Objects and the MVC design pattern
In iOS controller are generally expected to fill at least one the following roles:
Coordinating controllers provide application specific logic. They respond to delegate messages, notifications, and IBActions. Coordinating controllers also setup connections between other objects and often manage the creation and destruction of those objects.
View controllers, specifically UIViewControllers, manage the display of one "screen" worth of content and trigger transitions to the next "screen". They respond to memory warnings and rotation events.
Mediating controllers exist in OS X but their role is usually filled by view controllers in iOS. They act as an intermediary between views and models; updating models when views receive input and updating views when models change.
If the behavior you are implementing fits into one of these categories you probably want to create a controller object. If your logic is only concerned with the display of data (and possibly responding to user input) then perhaps it belongs in the view layer. If your logic is about the data itself then it probably belongs in the model.
If you can't find a good fit for your logic in any of those layers then you probably should model it differently as a combination of different responsibilities which belong on different objects in different layers. ie a view which requests data to display from a mediating view controller.
You would also subclass the UIViewController if you're going to use an AdBannerView in your "view". AdBannerView needs a UIViewController to be able to work.
The thumb rule I follow is, If you are doing custom drawing, subclass UIView. Otherwise, subclass the UIViewController.

MVC when developing in objective-C without using the Interface Builder

What is the correct way of implementing true MVC in Objective-C (Cocoa/iPhone) when the view is NOT created with Interface Builder?
How do I best structure the code and tie the different components of the MVC pattern together when I'm not using the Interface Builder in my project?
Usually when you are trying to create a view without any help from a nib file, you will have to implement that view's controller's loadView method.
So my answer is, any stuff related to V goes to the loadView method in your controller's implementation, any other logic stuff related to C goes to the rest part of your controller's implementation.
It's really a matter of taste : some absolutely think that to one viewController you can have one and only one view so the only manner is to subclass UIView for every view. I totally accept that a viewController manages multiple sub view constituting a screen and I only subclass UIView where it make sense in term of reusability. In fact, I also accept that a viewController use multiple viewControllers to manage different isolated part of the view as does the UINavigationContoller for example.
Usually you create a subclass of the element you want to display. For instance a UITableView which you set in the init method. This way, you're ViewController just dequeues an instance of it

How do I set up several custom UIViewControllers under one central view controller programmatically?

Being new to Xcode and Objective-C I find it hard to get my head around the Interface builder and Objective-C when doing things that are following the basic pattern. I have created a subclass of UIViewController that I want to instantiate several times to make a grid with each row being controlled by an instance of this class. So there will be one root view controller (with navigation etc) that should include/genereate all the instances of the custom sub-viewcontroller.
Now what would be the best way to do this? All examples I can find are about navigation, where one view should replace another, but I want to have all the viewcontrollers visible on the same "page". Do I need to create a nib file for the custom controller at all? I have also been thinking about using the UITableView somehow but inserting my custom viewcontroller in every row.
Any help greatly appreciated!
Apple's documentation recommends using one view controller per screen. It is possible to decompose your interface and use multiple view controllers on one screen if you have a good reason to do it, but Apple hasn't really designed their frameworks to support this, so you'll run into pitfalls if you don't know what you're doing.
In this case, I question whether each row of your grid really needs its own view controller. I find it hard to imagine a case where this would be the best choice, although it's hard to say for sure without knowing more about your app. Some things to consider:
What is your custom controller doing? Is it mostly changing the visual appearance of its corresponding grid row? If so, perhaps it would be more appropriate to subclass the UIView itself.
If this object is really behaving as a controller and not a view, consider implementing it as a subclass of NSObject rather than subclassing UIViewController. The UIViewController for your screen can capture events and delegate them to the appropriate custom controller object, or your custom views can capture their own events and notify their associated controllers of those events directly using a delegate pattern.
If you're sure you have a valid reason to implement these objects as UIViewController subclasses, check out my answer to this question.

When to use a UIView vs. a UIViewController on the iPhone?

I have always sort of wondered when to use a UIView vs. a UIViewController on the iPhone.
I understand that you shouldn't use a UIViewController unless it's a full-screen view, but what other guidelines are there?
For example, I want to build a modal overlay - a screen that will slide into place over the current screen. If this modal overlay is full-screen, should it be a UIViewController? The last time I built something like this, I subclassed UIViewController, but now I wonder if that was correct.
From Apple's View Controller Programming Guide for iOS:
"The most important role of a view controller is to manage a hierarchy of views. Every view controller has a single root view that encloses all of the view controller’s content. To that root view, you add the views you need to display your content."
Also:
"There are two types of view controllers:
Content view controllers manage a discrete piece of your app’s content and are the main type of view controller that you create.
Container view controllers collect information from other view controllers (known as child view controllers) and present it in a way that facilitates navigation or presents the content of those view controllers differently.
Most apps are a mixture of both types of view controllers."
This is a great question.
My basic rule of thumb. Is that every major 'page' of an application gets it's own view controller. What I mean by that is that during the wire framing stage of application design, everything that exists as its own entity will eventually be managed by its own View Controller. If there is a modal screen that slides over an existing screen, I will consider that to be a separate 'page' and give it its own view controller. If there is a view that overlays and existing page (such as a loading screen or help popup.) I would treat those differently, implement them as UIView subclasses and keep the logic in that 'pages' view controller. It the popup has behavior I will communicate back to that pages View Controller using the delegate pattern.
I hope this helps. It is very much a philosophical and architectural question and much could be written about it.
I use UIViewController whenever a view is full screen and either has outlets/actions and/or subviews.
Put everything on a screen into a UIViewController until the view controller starts to have too much code, then break out the screen into multiple UIViewControllers contained by one master view controller...
To put that into context of your answer, make a view controller for that modal overlay. It will have one anyway if you are using a nav controller to present it (and you probably should).
I have a somewhat different approach:
Override UIView if you plan to do custom drawing in drawRect. Otherwise, subclass UIViewController and use [self.view addSubview: blah] to add the components of the page.
There are a few other special cases, but that handles about 95% of the situations.
(You still will often need a UIViewController with a custom UIView. But it's common to have a custom UIViewController with no corresponding custom UIView.)
Is the thing that slides in a self contained screen? I mean, does it directly interact with the parent? If so, make it a UIView, if not, probably recommend a UIViewController.
A UIView is part of the UIViewController see the view property of UIViewController for this. As you pointed out correctly UIViewController manages a complete screen and there should be only one visible UIViewController at a time. But in most cases you will have more UIViews or subclasses of UIView visible on the screen.
The example you gave would be a correct use in most cases. As you may have noticed you will get a lot of functionality when subclassing the UIViewController. Animating the appearance and dismissal of the UIViewController would be one of them.
As marcc pointed out if the thing you want to slide in is not a self contained screen you would be better off using a UIView.
As a conclusion I would say that if you want to use the functionality that comes with subclassing UIViewController than go for it make it a UIViewController. Otherwise a UIView might be better.
The itunes U Standford class has a great lecture on UIViewControllers I would recommend watching it, because it has a lot of information regarding UIViewControllers in general.
If you are familiar with the MVC pattern, then you should be able to understand the difference between UIVIew and UIViewController. To make a simple statement, UIView is for rendering UI elements on screen. UIView is the superclass of pretty much all Cocoa Touch UI elements. Those elements do not know what information they are supposed to display, what they should do when a user clicks a button, what happens when an async network request is completed and so on. UIViewController is for all that and more. The view controller is responsible for placing the UI elements in the correct locations on screen, setting the contents of the UI elements, handling button presses and other user inputs, updating the model when needed etc.
Conceptually, a single UIViewController controls the contents of the whole screen in an iPhone App and that is why it is often easy to think of things in terms of view controllers. If you need a view where the user can select ingredients for a food recipe, you'll need a UIViewController for that. I made this distinction for myself because coming from a Java background I wasn't used to the framework enforcing MVC. I would think of things in terms of UIViews, and start implementing them that way and then run into all sorts of trouble because of that. If you are going to stick to UIKit for your App, then the workflow Apple has made for you is: for each separate view in your App, create a UIViewController subclass and then use Interface Builder to place the UI elements and to create connections for buttons etc. It works wonders, saves a ton of time and lets you concentrate on making your App function well.
I use UIViewController for showing View on full Screen.
For better control on custom view I prefer subclass of UIViewController instead of UIView, earlier I was using UIView for making custom sub class.

Why shouldn't a UITableViewController manage part of a window in Cocoa Touch?

I have a view that contains a UITableView and a UILabel which works perfectly as far as I can tell. I really don't want to manage the UIView and UITableView with the same controller as the UITableViewController handles a lot of housekeeping and according to the documentation:
If the view to be managed is a
composite view in which a table view
is one of multiple subviews, you must
use a custom subclass of
UIViewController to manage the table
view (and other views). Do not use a
UITableViewController object because
this controller class sizes the table
view to fill the screen between the
navigation bar and the tab bar (if
either are present).
Why does Apple warn against using it and what will happen if I ignore this warning?
Update: Originally I quoted the following from the Apple Documentation:
You should not use view
controllers to manage views that fill
only a part of their window—that is,
only part of the area defined by the
application content rectangle. If you
want to have an interface composed of
several smaller views, embed them all
in a single root view and manage that
view with your view controller.
While this issue is probably related to why UITableViewController was designed to be fullscreen, it isn't exactly the same issue.
The major practical reason to use only one view controller per screen is because that is the only way to manage navigation.
For example, suppose you have screen that has two separate view controllers and you load it with the navigation controller. Which of the two view controllers do you push and how do you load and reference the second one? (Not to mention the overhead of coordinating the two separate controllers simultaneously.)
I don't think using a single custom controller is a big of a hassle as you think.
Remember, there is no need for the TableviewDataSource and the TableViewDelegate to be in the actual controller. The Apple templates just do that for convenience. You can put the methods implementing both protocol in one class or separate them each into there own class. Then you simply link them up with the table in your custom controller. That way, all the custom controller has to do is manage the frame of tableview itself. All the configuration and data management will be in separate and self-contained objects. The custom control can easily message them if you need data from the other UI elements.
This kind of flexibility, customization and encapsulation is why the delegate design pattern is used in the first place. You can customize the heck out of anything without having to create one monster class that does everything. Instead, you just pop in a delegate module and go.
Edit01: Response to comment
If I understand your layout correctly, your problem is that the UITableViewController is hardwired to set the table to fill the available view. Most of the time the tableview is the top view itself and that works. The main function of the UITableViewController is to position the table so if you're using a non-standard layout, you don't need it. You can just use a generic view controller and let the nib set the table's frame (or do it programmatically). Like I said, its easy to think that the delegate and datasource methods have to be in the controller but they don't. You should just get rid of the tableViewController all together because it serves no purpose in your particular design.
To me, the important detail in Apple's documentation is that they advise you not to use "view controllers [i.e., instances of UIViewController or its subclasses] to manage views that fill only a part of their window". There is nothing wrong with using several (custom) controllers for non-fullscreen views, they just should not be UIViewController objects.
UIViewController expects that its view takes up the entire screen and if it doesn't, you might get strange results. The view controller resizes the view to fit the window (minus navigation bars and toolbars) when it appears, it manages device orientation (which is hard to apply correctly if its view does not take up the entire screen) etc. So given how UIViewController works, I think there is merit to Apple's advice.
However, that doesn't mean that you can't write your own controller classes to manage your subviews. Besides the things I mentioned above, interacting with tab bar and navigation controllers, and receiving memory warnings, there isn't really much that UIViewController does. You could just write your custom controller class (subclassed from NSObject), instantiate it in your "normal" fullscreen view controller and let it handle the interaction with your view.
The only problem I see is the responder chain. A view controller is part of the responder chain so that touch events that your views don't handle get forwarded to the view controller. As I see it, there is no easy way to place your custom controller in the responder chain. I don't know if this is relevant for you. If you can manage interaction with your view with the target-action mechanism, it wouldn't matter.
I have an application where I did use 2 separate UIViewController subclasses below another view controller to manage a table view and a toolbar. It 'kind of' works, but I got myself into a massive pickle as a result and now realize that I should not be using UIViewController subclasses for the sub controllers because they contain behavior that I don't need and that gets in the way.
The sort of things that went wrong, tended to be:
Strange resizing of the views when coming back from sub navigation and geometry calculations being different between viewWillLoad and viewDidLoad etc.
Difficulty in handling low memory warnings when I freed the subview controllers when I shouldn't have done.
Its the expectation that UIViewController subclasses won't be used like this, and the way they handle events, using the navigation controller etc that made trying to use more than one UIViewController subclass for the same page tricky because you end up spending more time circumventing their behaviour in this context.
In my opinion, The Apple Way is to provide you the "one" solution. This served the end-users very well. No choice, no headache.
We are programmers and we want to and need to customize. However, in some cases, Apple still doesn't want us to do too many changes. For example, the height of tab bar, tool bar and nav bar, some default sizes of the UI components(table view), some default behaviors, etc.. And when designing a framework and a suite of APIs, they need to nail down some decisions. Even if it's a very good and flexible design, there is always one programmer in the world wants to do something different and find it difficult to achieve against the design.
In short, you want a table view and a label on the same screen, but they don't think so. :)