When creating a UIViewController derived class in objective-C, what goes into the init method, what should go into loadView and what into viewDidLoad - and more importantly why, and what benefit (performance?) does this have?
Also, how does this relate to UIView derived classes where the only option you have is the init method?
I know the template code already has comments for what goes into each method, but it unclear to me why each thing goes where they say.
Clarification
I would like to know maybe at a lower level, what is the actual difference between things being done in the 'init', 'loadView' and 'viewDidLoad'. What does the framework do in between these calls that may affect the way/time I set up my views and do other work? How are these methods affected by threading?
You want to know some lower-level stuff.
init: This method gets called on ANY NSObject subclass. It is what sets up the object, which you probably already know. In many model (as in the MVC pattern) classes, init is directly used. As for the UIKit classes, very few requires init to be called directly. It should not be used. In the UIViewController, you initialize it using initWithNibNamed:. You can override this method, but in most cases this is not needed. This method is the VERY first method to EVER get called on the class (before any view setup, or such).
loadView:and viewDidLoad: read this article iPhone SDK: what is the difference between loadView and viewDidLoad? .
The only really important thing to know is that -init is the NSObject standard initialization method. -loadView and -viewDidLoad are UIViewController's methods for initialization.
Related
-(void)viewwillAppear
{
[super viewwillAppear:animated];
}
What does mean of calling [super viewwillAppear:animated] and what happen if we not call it?
By using super you are calling the base class version of the method. You will see similar call in init, dealloc, viewDidLoad etc. methods. The reason is in base class's implementation something important may be carried out without which the derived class will not work properly. When you have overridden the method in derived class, you will need to make a call to the base version by using super.
The only situation you will not call base class's method by using super is when you know that you don't need the tasks carried out by base class, in other words you are overriding completely. This is not the situation with viewWillAppear:animated or viewDidLoad etc. So we always call super in these cases.
Apple's documentation for viewWillAppear: just says:
If you override this method, you must call super at some point in your implementation.
It will probably lead to some unexpected behavior if you don't call it. Note that 'at some point' means you don't have to call it first.
The reference clearly states
This method is called before the
receiver’s view is about to be
displayed onscreen and before any
animations are configured for showing
the view. You can override this method
to perform custom tasks associated
with presenting the view. For example,
you might use this method to change
the orientation or style of the status
bar to coordinate with the orientation
or style of the view being presented.
If you override this method, you must
call super at some point in your
implementation.
Most overloaded methods require [super theMethod] call.
(For example, [super viewDidLoad];, [super viewWillAppear]; and [super dealloc];)
I didn't think twice whether I need [super touchesBegan:withEvent:] call or not, but it seems to play a role somehow.
When do I need it and when don't I need it?
I'm trying to programmatically cancel touch events when I need to, and it seems to be related to the question I asked.
While it all depends on the expected behaviors of the object, let's point out the basic: You call the superclass implementation in an overridden method (you mean overriding, not overloading) if you want default behaviors implemented by the superclass.
So the questions you should ask are:
1) What does the superclass implementation do?
2) Do I need it for my object?
So what does touchesBegan:withEvent: etc. of your superclass do? It depends on your class hierarchy. The custom classes in your class hierarchy may already override those methods and you may want those behaviors, or not. I assume that no custom class has yet overridden those methods, so you have to check Cocoa implementations only.
touchesBegan:withEvent: is first defined in UIResponder class. Let's look at the UIResponder documentation, which says
The default implementation of this method does nothing. However immediate UIKit subclasses of UIResponder, particularly UIView, forward the message up the responder chain.
So you get a theory here. If your class directly inherits from UIResponder, you don't need to call the superclass implementation at all as it does nothing anyway. If it inherits from other UIKit subclasses such as UIView, calling the superclass implementation will enable forwarding messages up the responder chain. However, overriding touchesBegan:withEvent: perhaps means that your subclass wants to handle touch events itself, so you don't want to forward the events up the responder chain. So, I guess you don't want to call the superclass implementation here.
It really depends on the situation. Say, that you subclass a UIScrollView, and implements one of the touches... method. If you still want the view to scroll as the user drags, then you want to call the superclass implementation because it will handle scrolling for you.
To sum up, you have to be able to answer the two questions above to decide. To find out what a superclass implementation does, read about it in the Apple Documentation. In many cases, if what a superclass implementation does is essential for common expected behaviors, the guide documents give an explicit advice to call the superclass implementation.
I'm working through an iPhone tutorial (link text and it has me put in some code (a few times throughout the various tutorials) but it doesn't explain it at all.
In this code:
todoAppDelegate *appDelegate = (todoAppDelegate *)[[UIApplication sharedApplication] delegate];
What exactly is an appDelegate? What does the "delegate" at the end of the instantiation mean? Actually, what does the whole thing mean? (UIIapplication sharedApplication)?
I am a .Net programmer if that helps someone explain it better. I hate learning through tutorials because I always need to know what EVERYTHING does and no one explains everything.
Let's back up a little bit.
The square brackets ([ ]) are Objective-C's method calling syntax. So if Cocoa had a C# syntax, the equivalent syntax would be:
TodoAppDelegate appDelegate = UIApplication.sharedApplication.delegate;
In C#, you would use a static class for a class that only has a single instance. In Cocoa, the Singleton pattern is used to accomplish this. A class method (in this case, sharedApplication) is used to retrieve the single instance of that class.
Delegates in Cocoa are not like the delegate keyword in C#, so don't be confused by that. In C#, you use the delegate keyword to reference a method. The delegate pattern in Cocoa is provided as an alternative to subclassing.
Many objects allow you to specify another object as a delegate. Delegates implement methods that those objects will call to notify them of certain events. In this case, UIApplication is the class that represents the current running application (similar to System.Windows.Forms.Application, for example). It sends messages to its delegate when things that affect the application happen (e.g. when the application launches, quits, gains or loses focus, and so on.)
Another Objective-C concept is the protocol. It is similar in principle to a .NET interface, except that methods can be marked as #optional, meaning they classes are not required to implement the methods marked that way. Delegates in the iPhone SDK are simply objects that conform to a specific protocol. In the case of UIApplication, the protocol delegates must conform to is UIApplicationDelegate.
Because it's not required to implement every method, this gives the delegate flexibility to decide which methods are worth implementing. If you wanted to, for example, perform some actions when the application finishes launching, you can implement a class that conforms to the UIApplicationDelegate protocol, set it as the UIApplication instance's delegate, and then implement applicationDidFinishLaunching:.
UIApplication will determine if its delegate implements this method when the application finishes launching and, if it does, call that method. This gives you a chance to respond to this event without having to subclass UIApplication.
In iPhone applications, developers also frequently use the app delegate as a kind of top-level object. Since you don't usually subclass UIApplication, most developers keep their global application data in the app delegate.
A delegate is just an object that implements certain methods (basically callbacks). The NSApplication docs explain what its delegate is supposed to do and what messages it needs to respond to to.
And this isn't instantiation. The snippet you posted above doesn't create anything. It accesses whatever object is set as the application's delegate. [UIApplication sharedApplication] gets the object representing the application, and sending delegate to the application gets its delegate (if any).
to add more to the mix of responses and another point of view, delegates are objects that can (but don't necessarily need to) do work for another object.
So let's say you have objectA, and can assign to it a delegate (let's call it delegateObject).
From objectA's point of view, there are certain bits of work that may need to be done. Depending on the context, the actual work and the results of such work can be different.
So instead of having objectA implementing a method for all these instances, we'll say... let's have another object, delegateObject, do the work... and as long as the results are returned in the proper format, we don't care what delegateObject did to get there.
objectA will first check that delegateObject exists and that delegateObject has implemented a method to do the work asked of it.
To accomplish this, NSObject (which every Cocoa object inherits from) has this method:
- (BOOL)respondsToSelector:(SEL)aSelector
and objectA would do a simple test before sending a message to delegateObject, for example:
if ([delegate respondsToSelector: #selector(someMethod:sender:)])
{
[delegate someMethod:#"stuff" sender:self];
}
and because objectA only sends a message to its delegate if one's been assigned, delegate is not retained by objectA.
if we were to use UITableView as an example, it has a lot of UITableViewDelegate methods. One of them is:
- (void)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView didSelectRowAtIndexPath:(NSIndexPath *)indexPath
every time the user touches a row in a table, the UITableView object will first check that there's a delegate, if there's a delegate, it'll then check that the delegate has implemented the above method. If it does, then it'll send the message to the delegate. This method expects no return value, and UITableView will go about its merry way, regardless of what the delegate does. And if there is no delegate that implements that method, then nothing happens.
While fixing third-party code I've discovered a really brilliant idea) Guy was using 2 appDelegate objects in project xibs. I assume he thought that this would be some kind of singletone or such. But after some rethinking of that piece of code, I found that there is no technical restrictions on it.
Here is my example: simple project with navController and 2 views. Each with it's viewController. When app launched, first view is on screen. When user taps button, second view is pushed to navController. For now there is appDelegate object in MainWindow.xib. Now, if you'll add just the same appDelegate object to second view's xib. Now right when second view is pushed, you can see that one more instance of appDelegate is created and destroyed (if you'll override init and dealloc methods and insert log there).
Here I'm very surprised. Does it mean that only one appDelegte instance can be created? If yes, then why? appDelegate is just a NSObject subclass implementing UIApplicationDelegate protocol.
The appDelegate object created by xCode on every iphone project is the entry and exit point of an application. It does not make sence to have more than one instance of this class, if you do (besides perhaps some application settings being lost) which class does the applicaiton delegate to? Why can you only make one? Most probably this is because the class is implementing a Singleton patterns under covers so ensure only one instance of the app delegate is made, i bet that even when you try to alloc another one of these, the original app delegate is the only one kept. You can probably dig around the docs and find more info on apples site at http://developer.apple.com/iphone
UIApplicationDelegate is a protocol and doesn't have state in itself, thus there's nothing that prevents you to have several of them. Contrast this with UIApplication that has state and
provides sharedApplication singleton accessor
It should be totally possible to replace UIApplication's delegate property on the fly. I don't see much of the benefit, though.
I think what's happening here is that there is an instance of the AppDelegate class in the second Nib, but no other objects are retaining it. Therefore it gets created and immediately released. If you added a retained property to the view controller that connected to the AppDelegate, then it wouldn't get released immediately.
You can have multiple objects that implement the UIApplicationDelegate protocol, but it's not usually done because 90% of the behavior would be identical in all cases.
I think you could do something along these lines:
Note the old UIApplication.delegate.
Create your instance of UIApplicationDelegate with the old delegate as parameter.
Make sure to call the old delegate in each method you implement.
Make it return the old delegate in the - (id)forwardingTargetForSelector:(SEL)aSelector method.
Replace the [UIApplication sharedApplication].delegate with yours.
It replaces the original app delegate with your, making sure that the old delegate will still be called, especially if you did not override each and every method the UIApplicationDelegate protocol defines.
My tabBarController-based app has several tabs. Each has a custom viewController class, the only difference being the way the instance is initialized. Is there a way to make interface builder send the different tabs custom init parameters?
Currently I'm doing the initialisation in viewWillAppear, but for a bunch of reasons it would make sense to do it in IB instead of in the code.
Any suggestions?
thanks,
Kelso
Interface Builder creates an archive of objects that is unarchived when you program executes. You can't really tell IB to call particular methods.
If you need to initialize before viewWillAppear: is called, you can do so in awakeFromNib, which is guaranteed to be called after all objects have been loaded and all outlets have been connected to their targets.
If you want to do initialization even earlier, you can do so by overriding initWithCoder: (see the NSCoding protocol for documentation). I don't know if it is documented anywhere, but that is the designated initialized for objects being decoded from an archive.
In all of the above, you won't be able to receive parameters, but in the code you should be able to access whatever you need with some judicious use of global variables. You can also use [[UIApplication sharedApplication] delegate] to get access to your application delegate object.
I don't think there's any way to change what methods are called by the IB runtime when your nib is loaded. If you described what you were trying to accomplish (i.e. why doing the setup in viewDidAppear doesn't work for you), you might get a suggestion of a better way to handle your initialization.