What does this -> symbol mean? - iphone

I'm a little bit confused now after I've seen a code snippet for iPhone SDK which makes use of -> rather than dot notation. It looks a lot like PHP but it does work on the iPhone. Can someone explain what's up with ->, is that some deep C-secret I should know about?
Example:
- (void)setFileURLs: (NSArray*)elements {
if (self->fileURLs != elements)
fileURLs is an instance variable or property, like so:
#property(nonatomic, retain) NSArray *fileURLs;
and there's an #synthesize for fileURLs.
Now what I think this is: Because this is the setter method for fileURLs, it would be bad to use dot notation to access the instance variable. In fact, when I do it, the application crashes. That is because it calls itself over and over again, since the dot notation accesses the accessor method and not the ivar directly. But -> will access the ivar directly.
If that's right, the question changes a little bit: Why then write "self->fileURLs" and not just "fileURLs"? What's the point of adding that self-> overhead in front of it? Does it make sense? Why?

a->b is just another way for writing (*a).b. This is a way for accessing fields of a structure or instance variables of an object that are referenced by a pointer.

See section "Other operators" at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operators_in_C_and_C%2B%2B
Since self is a pointer, you have to use -> and not . to access its members. Prepending the self reference to fileURLs is probably just a coding style used by the author (equivalent to writing this.member).

Related

When to use #property? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Why should I use #properties?
When to use properties in objective C?
I have been programming in objective-c for a little over a year now, and I always felt like it was a convention to use #property and #synthesize. But what purpose do they really serve ? Are they solely there to be communicated between classes ? So, for instance, if I use an NSMutableDictionary only in the scope of the class where it was declared, an omission is O.K. ?
Another question:
If I set the property of an NSMutableDictionary, it is retained, right ? So, in my class I don't have to call alloc() and init(), do I ?
What are the rules to use properties ?
But what purpose do they really serve?
Access control to iVars and abstraction between representation and underlying data.
Are they solely there to be communicated between classes?
No, they are for when you want to control access to iVars instead of accessing them directly or when you could in the future change underlying data structures but wish to keep the current representation.
So, for instance, if I use an NSMutableDictionary only in the scope of the class where it was declared, an omission is O.K.?
It depends. Do you want to have controlled access to the iVar? Would it be possible for your code to change so the dictionary is fetched and not a direct iVar. Usually, the answer is yes.
If I set the property of an NSMutableDictionary, it is retained, right?
Depends on how you declare the property.
So, in my class I don't have to call alloc() and init(), do I?
You have sloppy wording here. I think you are asking if you still need to construct an instance of a property. Yes, you will need to construct an instance of a property in some way. There are lots of ways of doing this.
NOTE: the convention for talking about methods is use their signature. Instead of alloc(), you would use -alloc.
What are the rules to use properties?
This you will need to read the doc for.
Like in another languages, when we want to make our variable global or public we use public access modifier. In objective c when we want access our another class variable in other class, we use #property and #synthesize them. Basically #synthesize is way by which compiler create a setter and getter methods for that variable. You can manually create them but not use #synthesize.
By creating object of that class you can access your property variable in other class.
By using retain, you clear that is take place memory and not exist until that container class not goes dispose or released.
Properties simply make your life easier.
Nowadays use properties as much as you can in terms of memory management, code-style and timesaving.
What do #propertys do?
They can create getter and setter methods (depends on given parameters).
Normally you declare instance variables in the header file (like in c++).
Now you simply let that be and instead of that declare the properties you want for instance variables.
Properties can get multiple arguments.
For normal objective-c objects, where you need a pointer (*) you would write.
#property (nonatomic,retain,...)
When you #synthesize it it creates a getter and a setter.
The setter automatically does stuff like releasing your old object, that your variable hold and retaining the new one.
So you don't have to do that manually (which should be quite often the case). Thats important.
You also can give it arguments (readonly,readwrite) to decide if to set a setter or not.
You can even declare a #property in the header file readonly and override that in your implementation file with a extension (a category with no name).
To dive deeper into this, read the apple developer manuals, which are quite effective.
Hope that helps a bit.
Shure it is the tip of the iceberg, but it's mostly everything you need.

Regarding self. in viewDidUnload [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
When should I use the “self” keyword?
(6 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I have an attendant question to iPhone: Why do I need self.<> in viewDidUnload?
Since there is a difference between using self.instance and instance, when is only instance actually used? Just setting the reference to nil seems quite useless? Why is the option there?
Generally, you'll find a lot of useful information here: http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/MemoryMgmt/Articles/mmPractical.html%23//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40004447-SW4
For the rest of this answer, I'll assume that you are referring to properties automatically synthesised with the #synthesize directive in your .m files.
Executive summary
When you use the form self.property, retain/release is automatically taken care of for you. When you use the form instanceVariable without the self prefix, you're on your own with retain/release.
Longer explanation
When you omit the "self." part, what you really are doing is that you access the automatically generated underlying ivar which the compiler has given the same name as you have given to the property.
If you don't want the compiler to generate ivars of the same name, then you can use an extended form of the #synthesize directive, like this:
#synthesize myvariable=__myvariable;
That way, you will ask the compiler to create an underlying ivar called __myvariable instead of the default myvariable.
Using this extended form, you would refer to either self.myvariable (as a property) or __myvariable (as an instance variable), which can be handy to visually distinguish the two types of access.
With that in place, we can get to the substance of the matter.
When you use self.myvariable, you implicitly call the accessor methods (possibly synthesised for convenience), like this:
self.myvariable = #"Some string";
is equal to
[self setMyvariable: #"Some string"];
or, in the case of a right hand use of the property
myLocalVar = self.myvariable;
is equal to:
myLocalVar = [self myvariable];
The examples above use the accessor names recommended by Apple.
On the other hand, when you use the instance variable directly, you just assign the variables directly without going through the accessors.
Now, one huge advantage of using the accessors on the iPhone is that the automatically synthesised accessors also take care of the retain/release messages, so you don't have to worry about that - or waste code lines handling this somewhat tedious stuff.
Since there is no need to worry about retain/release when you are just reading a property, you could argue that you only need to use the property syntax (with self.) on the left side of an assignment, so whether you want to use the self.-syntax on the right hand side of an assignment is partly a matter of style.
Personally, I have developed a style where I try not to refer to automatically synthesised ivars, unless I have specified them in the #synthesize directive. Otherwise Apple might one day change the way an unspecified #synthesize directive works, and my builds would break. But that is just a personal precaution of mine.
There is one exception to all this, as stated in the docs linked at the top of this answer - and that is that you should not use accessors to the class' own instance variables in the init* methods. One the Mac, you shouldn't use them in the dealloc methods, either, but this is one point where Apple's coding recommendations differ between the two platforms.
Ok, this was a long answer to just say, read the docs, but I hope it clarifies things a little. Memory management in reference counted environments is not trivial, so don't despair if it isn't clear at first.
PS: And if you think this the sort of worries that others should solve for you, log a bug with Apple to ask for garbage collection on iOS. It works nicely on 64-bit OS X.

ObjectiveC ivars or #property

Working on iPhone, after a lot of headache and memory problems I just realized from other examples that we do not need to necessarly create #properties for each instance variable we define in header file. And actually I found out ivars easy to just allocate and release it after I use anywhere in the class, for #properties I have to use autorealese or I have serious problems and becareful how I allocate..
For instance for objects below, #properties(retain/copy..) is not used in headers in many examples;
{
NSURLConnection *connection;
NSMutableData *xmlData;
NsMutableString *string
}
But for some strings or object types #properties is used, I know that when we set #property cocoa creates some setters getters which are handling the relasing and retaining of the objects. But seems like as for xmlData or connection instance variables we do not need that and they do their job like this.
Are there some reference guidelines I can keep in mind on deciding whether or not to create #property's or just use simple ivars?
My only problem when using properties is not becuase I am lazy to define it, but when I carefully allocate and init them in code, I have to use autorelase and dont feel like I have the control when to release reset and allocate it again, and it gives me one more thing to worry about while and when and how should I release, reset it. I find ivars I can alloc and release anytime once anywhere easily without worrying about anything..or I am missing other things here.
Tnx
There seem to still be some misconceptions flying around about properties.
that we do not need to necessarly create #properties for each instance variable we define in header file
Correct. You can use private instance variables directly in your implementation file. However, since synthesized properties come with free memory management, you might as well take advantage. My rule of thumb is to use the ivar directly until the first time I find myself writing:
[ivar release];
ivar = [newIvar retain];
As Sam says, there is already a potential bug there if iVar == newIVar. This is the point at which I switch from using ivars directly to creating a property. However, I put the declaration of the new property in a class extension in the implementation file. This means that the property is officially not part of the public interface (and will cause compiler warnings if used accidentally).
when we set #property cocoa creates some setters getters which are handling the relasing and retaining of the objects.
Actually, no. The #property just declares a property. In order to automatically generate the getter and setter, you need to #synthesize it. You could, alternatively write your own getters and setter which do not even have to reference a real ivar.
Technically, you should not use the property in the init or dealloc methods because a subclass might have overridden them or (in dealloc) you might set off a KVO notification.
From Sam's answer and comments
If you want a property regardless, you could use a private interface at the top of the implementation file
As I say above, private categories have sort of been obsoleted by class extensions (which is near enough the same thing but allows you to put the implementation of the methods in the main class implementation).
If you want the benefits of using dot notation shorthand
Some of us would argue that there are no benefits to dot notation. It's a gratuitous and needless pollution of the struct member syntax. However, dot notation has no relation to #property declarations. You can use dot notation for any accessors no matter how they were declared, provided they adhere to the pattern -foo and and -setFoo:
Create properties only for variables that need to be accessed from outside the class. Any class variables that are used internally need not have getters/setters defined.
Generally speaking an abundance of properties indicates high coupling and poor encapsulation. You should restrict what variables your class exposes in the interface.
EDITED to respond to comment:
Using properties over direct access may be preferred because it gives you easy memory management.. for example:
// interface
#property (retain) Object *someVar;
// implementation
self.someVar = otherVar;
is the same as
// implementation
if (_someVar != othervar)
{
[_someVar release]
_someVar = [otherVar retain];
}
However you should not needlessly expose vars in your interface because it opens the class up for people to use in the wrong way.
If you want a property regardless, you could use a private interface at the top of the implementation file
#interface TheClass(Private)
// private stuff
#end
First of all, let me say that Sam's answer is complete, IMO, and gives you clear guidelines (+1 from me).
My only problem when using properties is not becuase I am lazy to define it, but when I carefully allocate and init them in code, I have to use autorelase and dont feel like I have the control when to release reset and allocate it again, and it gives me one more thing to worry about while and when and how should I release, reset it. I find ivars I can alloc and release anytime once anywhere easily without worrying about anything..or I am missing other things here.
You should not worry about autorelease in the following idiom:
self.stringProperty = [[[NSString alloc] initWith...] autorelease];
because this is the way that things are meant to work;
EDIT: [the above statement has several parts:
the object is allocated and initialized (retain count is 1);
immediately, the allocated object is also autoreleased; this means that the object will be released automatically, (more or less) when the control flow gets back to the main loop;
in the very same statement, the allocated object is assigned to a retained property, self.stringProperty; this has the effect of (once again) incrementing the retain count;
So, it is true that autorelease adds some "ambiguity", because the object will be released at a time that you don't know precisely (but pretty soon anyway), but assigning to the retain property will increase the retain count so that you have full control over the lifetime of the object.]
If you don't like the autorelease you can always use a constructor method which gives you back an autoreleased object, when available:
self.stringProperty = [NSString stringWith...];
or assign directly to the ivar:
stringProperty = [[[NSString alloc] initWith...] autorelease];
because by accessing directly the ivar you are bypassing the setter and getter. Anyway, do the it only in this case (IMHO) to avoid ambiguities.
More in general, the autorelease glitch is the only drawback that using properties has over directly accessing the ivars. The rest are, IMO, only advantages that in many cases will save your life, and if not your life, a leak or a crash.
There is nothing you cannot do with directly accessing the ivars and taking care of when it is necessary to release before assigning, or not forgetting to set to nil after releasing, etc., but properties will do that easier for you, so my suggestion is simply use them and accept the autorelease shortcoming. It's only a matter of getting the basic "idioms" right.
It has long been custom to access ivars directly. That is, IMO, fine from inside the same class, although many properties are classes and then properties provide protection against retain/release issues.
IMO, it is, however, preferrable to encapsulate most ivars into properties, especially those that have retain/release semantics, but also those that need special handling, i.e. for which you write your own handlers, instead of using the synthesized ones. That way you can filter access to certain ivars, or even create properties that don't have any backing storage, and are just "aliases" to other properties, e.g. an Angle class that has a degrees property giving the angle in degrees, and a radians property denoting the same angle in radians (this is a simple conversion), or a property that must do a dictionary search to find its value, etc.
In Delphi, which was (AFAICT) one of the first languages with properties as language construct at all, it is customary to wrap ALL ivars in properties (but not all have to be public), and there are many such "unreal" (I am deliberately avoiding the term "virtual" here) properties, i.e. the ones that are only implemented in code, and not just getters and setters for an ivar.
Properties provide encapsulation, abstraction and a degree of protection against certain often made errors, and that is why they are to be preferred over direct access to ivars, IMO.
Addition
It doesn't make sense to declare and implement (either via #synthesize or with custom setters and getters) public properties for each ivar. Only expose publicly what others may need. Internal state can also be exposed to your own code via properties, but that should be done with a private or empty category in the implementation file. That way you get the automatic handling of retain/release and still don't expose them to the public.

Why use 'self.' when its not forced?

I noticed a difference between the way I code (badly ;) ) and the code I see from others.
Can anybody explain why I see some people using
self.varname.anotherpropertie
When
varname.anotherpropertie
Seems to work just as well. I dont use self. a lot in my code. I'm wondering is this very bad or is there something that I need to learn to understand why its used so much by most people?
Thanks again,
-Code
They are different things. In a class where you have an instance variable named foo with a declared property also named foo, writing simply foo accesses the instance variable while self.foo goes through the getter method for the property (which might just return the instance variable or it might do more).
I'd suggest taking a look at the Declared Properties chapter of Apple's The Objective-C Programming Language for a full explanation of how it works and when to choose which option.
One gotcha that I've run into is the retain vs non-retain with properties.
So if you have a retained property like this:
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSString* myStr;
#synchronized myStr;
and you do something like this:
- (void) myMethod:(NSString*)inStr
{
myStr = inStr;
}
In this example you will not actually retain the string as your property is not invoked. If you change the assignment line to use the property (by using "self.") then the string would be retained (and the previous string would be released if non-nil).
self.myStr = inStr;
It takes some getting used to that properties are method calls, but once you start seeing them as such then the "self." syntax becomes much more clear. Hope that helps some.

How to make a Global Array?

So, I read this post, and it's pretty much exactly what I was looking for. However... it doesn't work. I guess I'm not going to go with the singleton object, but rather making the array in either a Global.h file, or insert it into the _Prefix file.
Both times I do that though, I get the error:
Expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'static'
and it doesn't work. So... I'm not sure how to get it to work, I can remove extern and it works, but I feel like I need that to make it a constant.
The end goal is to have this Mutable Array be accessible from any object or any file in my project. Help would be appreciated!
This is the code for my Globals.h file:
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
static extern NSMutableArray * myGlobalArray;
I don't think I need anything in the implementation file. If I were to put that in the prefix file, the error was the same.
EDIT
So, I removed the .m file from Globals, and I just have the code about in Globals.h. Assuming I am going to continue with this terrible practice of having global variables (I know it's bad, I just want to test this out), I now have a new error. It says:
"Multiple storage classes in declaration specifiers"
If I remove "extern" it works and if I remove "static" it works, but having both doesn't... what now?
****Double Edit****
Aright, so I've tried adding the array to my UIApplication Delegate, but I'm doing it wrong because it isn't working. Could someone give me some example code as to where to place it an access it? I don't know if it should go in the implementation, or somewhere else, and once the array is initialized how to access it from the other files... Do I set a new variable to the array, or something?
Just a general programming suggestion--don't share an array. You have no control over it and it will be virtually impossible to trace if something changes it at a time and in a way you aren't expecting.
Instead, create an object with the array inside it and make that object a singleton (or better yet, make a factory for it).
Whenever you want to modify your array, call methods on the object to do so. If you do this, I bet you will find a lot of redundant code you can factor into this object (for instance, searching the array for a value--make a "search" method in the object instead and pass in a value).
It may seem like a lot of work you shouldn't have to do, but you'll find it's fairly fun work, and you should find that you DO have to do it once you see how much code belongs in this object...
Just add the array as a property of the application delegate, and access it like:
[[UIApplication sharedApplication] myArray];
The two (main) ways of making an array global are separate -- either you have a class with a method
static NSMutableArray *foo;
+(NSMutableArray *)foo {
return foo;
}
(in the .m file) with the static piece NOT in the header file, or just
static extern NSMutableArray * myGlobalArray;
with out the singleton wrapper (which I think is better as it saves you from having an extra bit of unnecessary code)
Either way, it is still a bad practice that I would try to avoid.
In general, the presence of a "Globals.h" file is a bad smell that there's an antipattern at work.
I would even advise against Bill K's advice and not use a Singleton pattern at all.
Instead, create the array in your app delegate, and pass it to your root view controller(s), and along the hierarchy to the components that need access to it.
This is what I was looking for:
http://derekneely.com/tag/app-delegate/
Thank you for pointing me in the right direction!
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
static extern NSMutableArray * myGlobalArray;
#interface Globals : NSObject {
}
#end