Assigning a protocol to an NSMutableDIctionary? - iphone

I am using a singleton backbone in my application to handle accuring errors. They will be handled inside the singleton and broadcast a notification throughout the app when the error has been fixed. Anyways this is not what my question is about but when I pass a new error to the singleton object like this
[[SingletonErrors sharederrors] addError:ErrorDictionary_here];
I want ErrorDictionary_here to be a NSMutableDictionary protected by a given #protocol in my code so whenever I give my code to others in my team they get warnings about error information they might have forgotten to pass into the dictionary.
Is this even possible for starters because this is about adding protocols to setters and a getter is much more easy like
-(NSMutableArray< myprotocol > *)getmyError{
}
I hope some one can help me out.
I'm not seeking for passing objects (read class instances) instead of the dictionary just a protocol applied on my dictionary.

It is also possible to implement a protocol through a category like so:
#interface NSMutableDictionary_TD(ErrorExtensions) <ErrorProtocol>
#end
#implementation NSMutableDictionary(ErrorExtensions)
//implement the ErrorProtocol here
#end

If I understand what you're asking, you should be able to do this without too much hassle. In your singleton class SingletonErrors, you should have:
#interface SingletonErrors : NSObject {
// some definitions ...
// The current array of all errors. This can also be an NSMutableSet if you like
NSMutableArray *sharedErrors;
// more definitions ...
}
// some properties ...
#property(nonatomic,retain) NSMutableDictionary<ErrorProtocol> *sharedErrors;
// more properties ...
- (void)addError:(NSMutableDictionary<ErrorProtocol> *)newError;
#end
You should create the protocol to be implemented. In this sample protocol, let's say you want to provide a single method to check whether the object is valid - that is, the dictionary contains all the relevant information.
#protocol ErrorProtocol
- (BOOL)isValid;
#end
You'll then need to subclass NSMutableDictionary so that your class implements the ErrorProtocol protocol:
#interface MyMutableDictionary : NSMutableDictionary <ErrorProtocol> {
}
#end
#implementation MyMutableDictionary
- (BOOL)isValid {
// Do your validity checking here
return YES; // Obviously change this line
}
#end
Then, whenever you throw an error, you can pass in a new instance of MyMutableDictionary to SingletonErrors, and have it call the isValid selector on the MyMutableDictionary, since it's assured that the dictionary will conform to ErrorProtocol and responds to isValid:
- (void)addError:(NSMutableDictionary<ErrorProtocol> *)newError {
if([newError isValid]) {
// Add the new error to the current array of errors
[self.sharedErrors addObject:newError];
// Other code to "broadcast" the error would go here
} else {
// Some code to error out of adding the error would go here
}
}
Overall, what this solution does is:
Hold a NSMutableArray of all errors in SingletonErrors
Each error is an NSMutableDictionary that conforms to ErrorProtocol
The object we use for each error is MyMutableDictionary, a subclass of NSMutableDictionary
The protocol ErrorProtocol defines a method isValid that checks whether the error is OK to be added
The SingletonErrors object calls the isValid method and adds the error appropriately

Thats correct but the doesnt feel nice to me .. my solution merged with tim`s was
#implementation NSMutableArray (myAddition)
- (BOOL)isValid {
// Do your validity checking here
return YES; // Obviously change this line
}
#end
This saves a load of code .. Im a Objective C in blood and fains .. less is better :) .. thanks for your reply anyways because im sure this issue is not a basic objc issue. Its more advanced and i think loads of people will find this topic and see the fix and you fix is 100% right as well so thanks for that !..
My heart is to small to store the loving replies i get here :).

Related

C4 passing data between views

Hei,
I am using different subclasses for the different view in my application. for that I am now trying to pass a C4Image from one function to another.
My code is as follows:
in TakePhoto.m
cropPhoto= [CropPhoto new];
cropPhoto.canvas.frame=CGRectMake(0, 0, self.canvas.width, self.canvas.height);
cropPhoto.canvas.userInteractionEnabled = YES;
[cropPhoto setup:img];
cropPhoto.mainCanvas=self.canvas;
[self.canvas addSubview:cropPhoto.canvas];
img is declared as a C4Image in the TakePhoto.h
in CropPhoto.m I declared the setup function like this
-(void) setup:(C4Image)image{
//some code here
}
In the TakePhoto.m I'm getting the error
"No visible #interface for 'CropPhoto' declares the selector 'setup'."
I'm doing pretty much the same thing within the one subclass passing NSUIntegers and there it works. So is there anything else I need to do for C4Images or because I'm passing values between subclasses?
Your -(void)setup:(C4Image *)image; needs to be declared n the .h file of the class, otherwise no other objects will be able to call it.
You .h should look something like:
#interface CropPhoto
-(void)setup:(C4Image *)image;
#end
The reason for this is that setup:(C4image*)... is a custom method that you are implementing on your own, so you need to make it visible.
There could be a lot of other reasons as well.* Check out the following answers for different scenarios that generate the same issue:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/10387710/1218605
https://stackoverflow.com/a/14155178/1218605
https://stackoverflow.com/a/13001909/1218605

How to create global protocol method in iPhone?

I create one protocol method and I want to implement the protocol method in multiple classes
#protocol XMLProtocol <NSObject>
- (BOOL) hasAllRequiredAttributes :(NSDictionary*)attributeMap;
#end
I have use this following class methods
#import "XMLProtocol.h"
#interface MachineA : NSObject<XMLProtocol>
and its implementation method I will implement the protocol method
- (BOOL) hasAllRequiredAttributes:(NSDictionary *)attributeMap {
return false;
}
and also i use this protocol method in another class
#import "XMLProtocol.h"
#interface MachineB : NSObject<XMLProtocol>
and its implementation method I will implement the protocol method
- (BOOL) hasAllRequiredAttributes:(NSDictionary *)attributeMap {
return false;
}
my thought is where should I call the protocol method. I totally confused. How can i do this.
One way you can define a global implementation for your protocol method (if I understand correctly what you are asking) is defining a category on NSObject:
#implementation NSObject (XMLProtocol)
- (BOOL) hasAllRequiredAttributes:(NSDictionary *)attributeMap {
return false;
}
By doing like this every object will have that method. Don't know if this is sensible, but it's a way.
Another way would be defining a Machine base class from which both MachineA and MachineB derive; the protocol method would be defined in the base class:
#interface Machine : NSObject <XMLProtocol>
...
#implementation Machine
- (BOOL) hasAllRequiredAttributes:(NSDictionary *)attributeMap {
return false;
}
....
#end
#interface MachineA : Machine
...
and any derived class could redefine it, if required.
This is not as "global" as the NSObject category, but it might be a better solution if you can define a base class for all the classes that need implement that protocol.
You must write the implementation of the method in both classes, even if the implementations are identical.
In you particular situation notification would be great help full to you. Notification works same like protocol except it broadcast the message. so you could receive that call on multiple classes.
if you want to done with protocol than also it is very easy. just make sure you current view controller is referenced with delegate (i.e. obj.delegate = self). you can implement that on -viewWillAppear. so your current view controller only get called of that method. Delegate will only call one method at one place in a time.
IMHO a global protocol is not very good design for something as specific as XML parsing.
A #protocol doesn't have any implementation part by itself. It is just an API definition, think of it like a contract. Any class that conforms to a protocol must implement its mandatory methods and properties (there is a #optional clause).
For instance, you may have two implementations of an XML parser, one that works in iOS 4 and another one that works in iOS 5+. Both declared as conforming to XMLProtocol protocol. And both implementing - (BOOL) hasAllRequiredAttributes :(NSDictionary*)attributeMap;, let's imagine that they need to implement it differently.
Thanks to being compliant to XMLProtocol you don't care about the implementation details. You know that you'll pass an attribute map and you'll obtain a boolean indicating if it has all required attributes.
You call the method where ever you use those classes:
id <XMLProcotol> parser;
if (iOS4) {
parser = [[OldXMLParser alloc] initWithString:<#...#>];
} else {
parser = [[NewXMLParser alloc] initWithString:<#...#>];
}
/* you call the method without caring which parser class
* has been actually created thanks to the protocol
*/
if ([parser hasAllRequiredAttributes:theMap]) {
...
}
If the implementation of the methods are identical, you can make both a subclass of a common parent class that implements the common methods, present or not in the protocol.

Calling a method with return type "void" in same file

I've got a simple question.
In Objective-C, when you have a method you want to call, with a return type of void, how you you call it from another method?
The way I've been doing it in my application is this:
[self nameOfMethod];
But that causes Xcode to spit out the following error:
Method '-nameOfMethod' not found (return type defaults to 'id')
Though it seems to still be executing.
Am I calling it right, or is there a better way?
Thanks!
I’m guessing you haven’t declared -nameOfMethod in the class interface and you’re calling it from another method whose implementation precedes the implementation of -nameOfMethod, i.e.:
- (void)someMethod {
[self nameOfMethod];
}
- (void)nameOfMethod {
// …
}
When the compiler is parsing -someMethod and -nameOfMethod hasn’t been declared in the class interface, it generates a warning because it doesn’t know about -nameOfMethod yet.
There are essentially two solutions for this. You could reorder the implementation file so that -nameOfMethod appears before -someMethod, but that’s not always possible. A better solution is to declare -nameOfMethod in the class interface. If -nameOfMethod is supposed to be called by clients of your class, place it in the corresponding header file. On the other hand, if -nameOfMethod is only supposed to be called inside your implementation file, use a class extension. Supposing your class is named SomeClass, this is what your header and implementation files would look like:
// SomeClass.h
#interface SomeClass : NSObject {
// … instance variables
}
// … external methods
- (void)someMethod;
#end
// SomeClass.m
#import "SomeClass.h"
#interface SomeClass () // this is a class extension
// … internal methods
- (void)nameOfMethod;
#end
#implementation SomeClass
- (void)someMethod {
[self nameOfMethod];
}
- (void)nameOfMethod {
// …
}
#end
Using class extensions, the order of method implementations won’t matter.
You need to make sure that your interface file contains a definition for nameOfMethod - so;
-(void) nameOfMethod;
You're calling it correctly, but make sure that the interface for your (void) method is in your .h file.

iPhone ivar naming convention [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
How does an underscore in front of a variable in a cocoa objective-c class work?
I've noticed that in a lot of the reference materials out there, I see that a lot of the time, variables are named _variable in the .h file, then are #synthesize'd in the .m file as
#synthesize variable = _variable;
Why is this done? What am I missing?
Thanks!
There is not consensus on this. Some people like to use it for clarity to separate out class variables, and as another responder noted to avoid conflict with incoming parameter names. Even in Apple sample code the use is mixed.
However, I greatly prefer to not use the _ prefix and have two strong reasons:
1) Some people think the _ is a good indicator of "private". My take is that NO class local variable should be accessed without a setter/getter (property) and thus they are ALL private - given that why not name them in a way easier to read and use autocomplete on? Any overlap in names from parameters is quickly revealed by the compiler, and avoided through more thoughtful naming of parameters (or internal variables).
2) (even better reason) - if you use "refactor" in XCode on an internal class var that is named the same as the property used to access it, the property and synthesize statement will also be renamed. If you use refactor on a class variable prefixed with an _, the property name will not be changed - just the synthesize mapping to the internal name. I pretty much never want the name to vary from the property to the real variable it exposes access to. That alone makes me never want to use _ as a variable prefix, since being able to shift names is just about the most useful thing you can do to improve code clarity.
Using that syntax is an option to make it more clear that the ivar and property are different things.
To code external to the class, there is no difference since it uses the property.
For code in the implementation of the class itself, it can make it more clear when the ivar is used versus the property.
For example, say we have an ivar/property for an NSNumber object:
#interface MyClass : NSObject {
NSNumber *num;
}
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSNumber *num;
- (void)doSomething;
#end
#implementation MyClass
#synthesize num;
- (void)doSomething {
// set the property, num is properly retained
self.num = [NSNumber numberWithInteger:1];
// accidentally set the ivar, num is NOT retained
num = [NSNumber numberWithInteger:2];
}
#end
and now using a different name for the ivar and property:
#interface MyClass : NSObject {
NSNumber *i_num;
}
#property (nonatomic, retain) NSNumber *num;
- (void)doSomething;
#end
#implementation MyClass
#synthesize num = i_num;
- (void)doSomething {
// set the property, num is properly retained
self.num = [NSNumber numberWithInteger:1];
// compiler error, there is no ivar named "num"
num = [NSNumber numberWithInteger:2];
// set the ivar, so it needs to be a retained object
i_num = [[NSNumber alloc] initWithInteger:3];
}
#end
Previous answers are missing the history behind this. Before Objective-C 2.0, there were no properties. So you’d have an object with instance variables like this:
#interface MyObject: NSObject {
NSArray *myArray;
}
#end
But how would you access them from other objects? the solution was to make setters and getters. But to avoid confusion, they would do it like this:
#interface MyObject: NSObject {
NSArray *_myArray;
}
- (NSArray *)myArray;
- (void)setMyArray:(NSArray *)myArray;
#end
The _ serves to clear up confusion between the instance variable _myArray and the method -myArray.
Sometimes people use mVarName (C++) and in Obj-c the style seems to be _varName.
One problem you can have, is imagine that your argument to a function is ...set:(int) x - BUT - you have an iVar called x...well your going to get the compiler crying about stuff like that - not to mention its confusing.
The m,_, whatever helps to show what are member properties of the class.
-(void) set:(int)x
{
x = x; // x is an ivar! heh
}
VS
-(void) set:(int)x
{
_x = x; // ahh I see!
}
This is purely convention. I suppose its common because when you make a method getter call like this:
[myObject variable]
you are actually calling a method, not accessing a variable directly. the _ in front makes it clear that you are talking about a variable. Personally, I find this syntax annoying and distracting. I find it unnecessary, but you are right, it does appear here and there.
I prefer not to use the '_' prefix because Apple does use it consistently. By avoiding the prefix I then have greater confidence that my ivars do not collide with Apple's when I extend a cocoa touch class. Since we do not have access to the base class' source this is really the only way I know of to avoid accidental reuse of existing private ivars.
Much like
Method names beginning with “_”, a single underscore character, are reserved for use by Apple.
My preference, following Google, is simply to append an underscore and explicitly synthesize (even if I'm reimplementing):
#synthesize varName=varName_;
If I see that trailing underscore outside of init..., dealloc or an accessor, I know something's fishy.

Public scope in Objective-C?

I’m sure this is a simple one, but it’s been elusive so far, and I’m stumped ...
How do I declare an Ivar so that it’s accessible from ALL Classes in a project?
[Don’t know if it matters, but the ivar in question is (an instance of) my Model class, whose data needs to be accessible to various view controllers.]
Best as I can tell from "The Scope of Instance Variables” in The Objective-C 2.0 Programming Language
... this would be by using the “#public” directive.
So I’ve tried this in the #interface block where the ivar is declared:
#interface ...
...
#public
ModelClass *theModel;
#end
... But when I try to refer to “theModel” in a different class, the compiler doesn’t auto-complete, and when I type it in anyway, the compiler shows:
“Error: ‘theModel’ undeclared (first use in this function)”.
I assume this is a question of Scope, and that I haven’t made the ivar available appropriately, but how? Somehow I need to access this, or make its pointer available somehow.
Any ideas would be VERY much appreciated. Many thanks!
Perhaps you forgot to put the instance variable inside the braces of the class where all instance variable declarations go?
#interface Foo : NSObject {
// other instance variable declarations
#public
ModelClass *theModel;
}
// method and property declarations
#end
Also, can you show us the code of how you are trying to access the instance variable from elsewhere? The proper syntax should be:
myFooInstance->theModel
where myFooInstance is a value of type "Foo *"
I make properties available to all views managed by a Tab Bar via a singleton representing my data model. This is efficient and allows all Views access to the data (as well as any other application elements. Creating the singleton is straightforward (there are a ton of examples on S.O.). The you just request the instance and get the property values you need.
Here is a framework fro creating the Singleton. The key points are the static instance and the fact that you do the initialization as [[self alloc] init];. This will ensure the object gets cleaned up correctly. All the methods at the bottom of the class are standard from the SDK Docs to make sure release calls are ignored (because the object is shared globally).
Singleton Boilerplate (ApplicationSettings.m):
static ApplicationSettings *sharedApplicationSettings = nil;
+ (ApplicationSettings*) getSharedApplicationSettings
{
#synchronized(self) {
if (sharedApplicationSettings == nil) {
[[self alloc] init]; // assignment not done here
}
}
return sharedApplicationSettings;
}
+ (id)allocWithZone:(NSZone *)zone
{
#synchronized(self) {
if (sharedApplicationSettings == nil) {
sharedApplicationSettings = [super allocWithZone:zone];
return sharedApplicationSettings; // assignment and return on first allocation
}
}
return nil; //on subsequent allocation attempts return nil
}
- (id)copyWithZone:(NSZone *)zone
{
return self;
}
- (id)retain
{
return self;
}
- (unsigned)retainCount
{
return UINT_MAX; //denotes an object that cannot be released
}
- (void)release
{
//do nothing
}
- (id)autorelease
{
return self;
}
You cannot access iVars from any other class.
You have to declare a getter/setter method to change or view a variable from another class - what you are really looking for are properties, that make it easier to define and access these getter/setter methods.
In your example above, you'd have the property defined just after the block that defines the local variable in the header file:
#property (nonatomic, retain) ModelClass *theModel;
In the implementation file you'd have the getter/setter created with the #synthesize statement just after the #implementation line:
#synthesize theModel;
Then if you have an instance of your class created, you access the class instance variable like so:
myInstance.theModel = [[[ModelClass alloc] init] autorelease];
The reason #public & #private are in there are to define visibility for subclasses (which, being extensions of that class type also get all the class local variables defined by a superclass), not for any random class.
The standard Objective-C way of doing it is to have a class method that returns the ivar
In your .h file:
+ (id)defaultModel;
and in your .m file:
static ModelClass * defaultModelInstance;
#implementation ModelClass
+ (id)defaultModel {
if (!defaultModelInstance) {
defaultModelInstance = [[ModelClass alloc] init];
}
return defaultModelInstance;
}
#end
although this will need tweaking if you need a specific ivar instead of just "a ivar that's always the same"
this type of design is used by many Cocoa classes i.e. [NSWorkspace sharedWorkspace]
Think a C global variable.
Adding:
extern ModelClass* theModel;
after the #end in the header will make the variable visible anywhere you include the header.
In the ModelClass.cpp file add:
ModelClass* theModel;
before the class implementation.
The variable will still have a value of nil until you allocate and initialize it though and you will be resposible for ensuring that it gets deallocated at the correct time.
THANK YOU ALL for the very helpful discussion on this topic! Clearly there are several ways to approach things here, so this is a very useful assortment of techniques.
Just to let y'all know that in researching this issue further, I ran across a couple of other very helpful pages, listed below. They include mention of the NSNotificationCenter, which I hadn't heard of before; as well as the idea of the "dependency injection" design pattern.
The idea is to keep "low coupling"(1) between the classes, making the code more modular & better for unit testing.
And while the 'notification' pattern sounds like a great idea, in this case it may be a bit overkill, considering that I only need ONE instance of the data model throughout the run of the app, and it doesn't change throughout.
Finally, even though the "#public" compiler directive is well-documented in Apple's Obj-C guide(2), I later found a fascinating edict in a different doc stating that it shouldn't be used! Quoted from Apple's own Cocoa Fundamentals(3):
"Give the proper scope to your instance variables. Never scope a variable as #public as this violates the principle of encapsulation. ..."
(Strange that they don't mention this in their 'Objective-C 2.0' guide where the directive is actually explained.)
Anyway, here are a couple of other links I found to be full of some great insights as well. FYI:
S.O.: "What’s the best way to
communicate between
viewcontrollers?"(4) <<
CocoaWithLove: "Five approaches to
listening, observing and notifying in
Cocoa"(5)
CocoaWithLove: "Singletons,
AppDelegates and top-level data"(6)
Hope these help. Anyway, thank you all again!
Best,
rond
P.S. Yikes! It won't let me post more than one inline hyperlink, so I'm listing them here instead. Obviously, they’re all prefixed by “http://” ... :O
(1): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling_(computer_science)
(2): developer.apple.com/DOCUMENTATION/Cocoa/Conceptual/ObjectiveC/Articles/ocDefiningClasses.html#//apple%5Fref/doc/uid/TP30001163-CH12-TPXREF127
(3): developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/CocoaFundamentals/AddingBehaviortoaCocoaProgram/AddingBehaviorCocoa.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002974-CH5-SW12
(4): stackoverflow.com/questions/569940/whats-the-best-way-to-communicate-between-viewcontrollers
(5): cocoawithlove.com/2008/06/five-approaches-to-listening-observing.html
(6): cocoawithlove.com/2008/11/singletons-appdelegates-and-top-level.html