I've been writing Objective-C for a few years now, and decided to go back and learn the very basics to help me write even better code. I'm trying to learn all about instance variables, inheritance and class extensions. I've been reading up on all three, but there is one thing that boggles my mind. I have a simple app that contains 2 classes, Person, Male (inherits from Person), and of course Main (which imports the Male class, therefore being able to access the instance variables found in both Person and Male).
The code is simple, and for the sake of space I won't post all of it. Basically Main takes these variables and plays around with them. This is the part that is boggling my mind:
#interface Person : NSObject {
float heightInMeters;
int weightInKilos;
}
#property float heightInMeters;
#property int weightInKilos;
#end
When I delete the brackets and variable declarations, leaving it like this:
#interface Person : NSObject
#property float heightInMeters;
#property int weightInKilos;
#end
The code still inherits and executes just fine.
1. What is the point of even declaring them there in the first place if we can just create two properties?
2. why create two instance variables AND properties to correspond with them?
3. I know that we can declare the variables in the .m instead to keep them private to the class and everything that subclasses it. like this:
#implementation Person {
float heightInMeters;
int weightInKilos;
}
What is the difference here? I feel like I'm missing a lot of basics. Is there a simplistic way of putting this all in perspective?
When you declare a #property, the compiler will automatically synthesize the variable prefixed with an underscore, a getter method, and a setter method.
#interface MyClass ()
#property(strong, nonatomic) NSString *myString;
#end
In this example the compiler would syhtnesize the variable as _myString, the getter as
-(NSString *)myString
and the setter as
-(void)setMyString:(NSString *)string
The keywords after "#property" (strong, nonatomic) define the property's attributes. strong, the default, implies ownership, meaning that in this case MyClass instances will essentially be responsible for the retain/release of their respective myString objects. nonatomic means the variable is not guaranteed to always be a valid value in a multithreaded environment, for example if the getter is called at the same time as the setter.
Additionally, the compiler will treat dot syntax used to retrieve/set instance variables as calls to the appropriate getter/setter methods. Therefore, given an instance of MyClass
MyClass *exampleClass = [[MyClass alloc] init];
Both of the following are equivalent statements:
NSString *string1 = example.myString; // dot syntax
NSString *string1 = [example myString]; // explicit call to the getter method
For further reading, take a look at Apple's Programming with Objective-C Guide.
As for your specific questions:
1. What is the point of even declaring them there in the first place if we can just create two properties?
It's actually not a good idea to declare variables explicitly as public variables in your MyClass.h file (or in most other cases). Instead, declaring them as properties automatically creates a private variable (and accessor methods), making adhering to OOP best practices a little easier. So there is no point in declaring
// MyClass.h
#interface MyClass : NSObject {
NSString *myString // public variables not good
}
Also because of what I stated above regarding dot syntax, if you use self.myString internally in MyClass.m or instanceOfMyClass.myString externally, the public variable myString will never even be touched because the synthesized variable is named _myString.
2. Why create two instance variables AND properties to correspond with them?
See above--you don't need two instance variables, only one.
3. I know that we can declare the variables in the .m instead to keep them private to the class and everything that subclasses it. What is the difference here? I feel like I'm missing a lot of basics. Is there a simplistic way of putting this all in perspective?
If you declare your variables privately in the #implementation part of your .m file, the compiler won't be able to help you by synthesizing the getters and setters. Even as private methods, getters and setters can help reduce complexity in your code, for example checking for the validity of variable values. (Note: you can override accessor methods.)
// MyClass.m
#interface MyClass () // private interface
#property(nonatomic, strong) NSString *myString;
#end
#implementation MyClass {
// no more need for private variables!
// compiler will synthesize NSString *_myString and accessors
}
-(void)setMyString:(NSString *)string { // overwrite setter
// no empty strings allowed in our object (for the sake of example)
NSAssert([string length] > 0, #"String must not be empty");
// assign private instance variable in setter
_myString = string;
}
#end
This way, even when you subclass MyClass, the subclass will inherit the getter and setter methods that were synthesized for us by the compiler.
Related
What is difference of these three cases (all of them are used like private fields):
1.
#interface APLParseOperation : NSOperation
#property (copy, readonly) NSData *earthquakeData;
#end
2.
#interface APLParseOperation () <NSXMLParserDelegate>
#property (nonatomic) APLEarthquake *currentEarthquakeObject;
#property (nonatomic) NSMutableArray *currentParseBatch;
#property (nonatomic) NSMutableString *currentParsedCharacterData;
#end
3.
#implementation APLParseOperation
{
NSDateFormatter *_dateFormatter;
BOOL _accumulatingParsedCharacterData;
BOOL _didAbortParsing;
NSUInteger _parsedEarthquakesCounter;
}
It's a good practice or smthing else?
I'm going to go through each example you gave, and describe them. I was just having trouble with this yesterday so I feel your pain.
1.
#interface APLParseOperation : NSOperation
#property (copy, readonly) NSData *earthquakeData;
#end
By using the #property keyword, the compiler automatically synthesizes your accessor methods for you, and also a backing instance variable. However, because you are using the readonly property attribute, the compiler is only synthesizing a getter method for you.
2.
#interface APLParseOperation () <NSXMLParserDelegate>
#property (nonatomic) APLEarthquake *currentEarthquakeObject;
#property (nonatomic) NSMutableArray *currentParseBatch;
#property (nonatomic) NSMutableString *currentParsedCharacterData;
#end
This second example is very similar to the first. However, because none of them have the readonly property attribute, they will all have getters and setter methods synthesized for them, as well as the backing instance variable.
3.
#implementation APLParseOperation
{
NSDateFormatter *_dateFormatter;
BOOL _accumulatingParsedCharacterData;
BOOL _didAbortParsing;
NSUInteger _parsedEarthquakesCounter;
}
For this last example, you are just declaring instance variables. These are also private to your implementation file, where as the other 2 examples had declarations being made in your classes interface file.
No setter or getter methods are being synthesized for you by the compiler. You are simply declaring some instance variables.
In terms of private and public, your first and second examples both provide declarations that will be visible to other classes, as long as they import the current class's header file. The first example however, only provides a way to "get" the property and read it, there is no setter method because you used the readonly property attribute. With the second example, outside classes will be able to access your getter and setter methods for your property, so they can read and write.
For the third example, these are just instance variables and they are private to your class's implementation file. Basically, no outside classes will even know that they exist.
This is not private. It is still readable by outside classes, though it can't be written.
Private properties. It can be useful if you want to write custom getters and setters. If you are not using ARC, it can be helpful for memory management.
Private members. This is my favorite. It's easy to read and easy to write.
defines a public property visible to all users of the APLParseOperation class.
defines properties through an extension, making them available only to the implementation methods.
defines instance variables which are implicitly private.
Number 1 is used when you want to make your properties public. Numbers 2 and 3 are for private properties and instance variables. You can also declare instance variables in class extensions, like this:
#interface APLParseOperation () <NSXMLParserDelegate>
{
NSDateFormatter *_dateFormatter;
BOOL _accumulatingParsedCharacterData;
BOOL _didAbortParsing;
NSUInteger _parsedEarthquakesCounter;
}
#end
There is not much difference between that and the number 3. It is a good idea to pick one style, and stick to it in all your code.
Case 1. is not private. It's a public read-only property: Reading is public, writing is only possible only in the private scope via the underlying ivar (thanks for pointing it out #mah).
Case 2. (if in a .m file) is extending the class by adding 3 private properties and making the protocol conformance private too.
Case 3. is declaring 4 private instance variables that can be used in all the implementation scope.
Objective-C best practice for private properties is case 2., as case 1. is not private at all, just read-only, and case 3. uses instance variables (aka ivar) which is less conventional than properties. More on that here: Reason to use ivars vs properties in objective c
Hope this helps,
I am trying to use NSPopUpButtons in my OSX program. In order to use KVO for its string and its index, I wrote a custom class (DLPopUpButtonManager).
#interface DLPopUpButtonManager : NSObject
#property NSArray *contentArray;
#property NSString *selectionString;
#property NSNumber *selectionIndex;
#end
That class works fine, when used only once in the program. But…
When I use more than one instance their contentArray is shared, meaning the two contentArrays point to the same instance. Huh?? That totally confuses me.
(Encapsulation, etc.)
I have two NSPopUpButtons that each are connected to an objects of class DLPopUpButtonManager. Those two classes are instantiated in Interface Builder though two objects. And in my AppDelegate I initialize them.
#interface AppDelegate : NSObject <NSApplicationDelegate>
#property (weak) IBOutlet DLPopUpButtonManager *pUBM_1;
#property (weak) IBOutlet DLPopUpButtonManager *pUBM_2;
#implementation AppDelegate
- (void)applicationDidFinishLaunching:(NSNotification *)aNotification {
[self.pUBM_1 setContentArray:[NSArray arrayWithObjects:#"Female", #"Male", nil]];
[self.pUBM_2 setContentArray:[NSArray arrayWithObjects:#"Tall", #"Short", nil]];
[self showDetails:nil];
}
I find that both instances (confusingly and unwanted) use the same contentArray.
I investigated using breakpoints and saw that I have indeed two separate instances of DLPopUpButtonManager, but their contentArrays have the same pointer value.
Printing description of $20: <DLPopUpButtonManager: 0x6080000100b0>
Printing description of $23: <DLPopUpButtonManager: 0x6080000100c0>
Printing description of $25: <__NSArrayI 0x600000223ba0>
(
Tall,
Short
)
Printing description of $24: <__NSArrayI 0x600000223ba0>
(
Tall,
Short
)
(lldb)
I can’t find anything like that through Google or here on SO. Who can tell me, what I am doing wrong here?
I uploaded a little sample program to GitHub (https://github.com/donnerluetjen/PopUpButtonEtude).
Thanks for any input on that issue.
Try moving the underlying ivars for your your array and selection index properties into a private extension in the .m file, to ensure that they are not in fact static variables.
#interface DLPopUpButtonManager (){
NSArray *_contentArray;
NSUInteger _selectionIndex;
}
Thanks to tjboneman I could solve my problem, and I read some more about instance variables and static instance variables. Here is what I found after some serious searching:
From Apple's docs, The Objective-C Language | Defining a Class:
Class Interface
...
Note: Historically, the interface required declarations of a class’s instance variables, the data structures that are part of each instance of the class. These were declared in braces after the #interface declaration and before method declarations:
#interface ClassName : ItsSuperclass
{
// Instance variable declarations.
}
// Method and property declarations.
#end
Instance variables represent an implementation detail, and should typically not be accessed outside of the class itself. Moreover, you can declare them in the implementation block or synthesize them using declared properties. Typically you should not, therefore, declare instance variables in the public interface and so you should omit the braces.
...
Class Implementation
The definition of a class is structured very much like its declaration. It begins with an #implementation directive and ends with the #end directive. In addition, the class may declare instance variables in braces after the #implementation directive:
#implementation ClassName
{
// Instance variable declarations.
}
// Method definitions.
#end
Thanks again, tjboneman for pointing me in the right direction.
I'm sure my confusion here is just a result of being stuck in a "Java mindset" and not understanding how Obj-C differs in this case.
In Java, I can declare a variable in a class, like this, and each instance of that class will have it's own:
MyClass {
String myVar;
MyClass() {
// constructor
}
}
In Obj-C I tried to do the same thing by declaring a variable only in the .m file like this:
#import "MyClass.h"
#implementation MyClass
NSString *testVar;
#end
My expectation here was that this variable has a scope limited to this class. So I created a second class (identical):
#import "MySecondClass.h"
#implementation MySecondClass
NSString *testVar;
#end
What I'm seeing (and has me baffled) is that changing the variable in one class, affects the value seen in the other class. In fact, if I set a breakpoint, and then "Jump to Definition" of the variable, it takes me to th
I've created an extremely small Xcode project that demonstrates the problem here.
Change this:
#implementation MyClass
NSString *testVar;
#end
to:
#implementation MyClass {
NSString *testVar;
}
// methods go here
#end
and you'll get what you expected.
As you had it, you are actually creating a global variable. The two global variables were combined into one by the linker which is why both changed when you set one. The variable in curly braces will be a proper (and private) instance variable.
Edit: After being downvoted for no apparent reason, I thought I'd point out the "old" way of doing things, and the new way.
The old way:
SomeClass.h
#interface SomeClass : UIViewController <UITextFieldDelegate> {
UITextField *_textField;
BOOL _someBool;
}
#property (nonatomic, assign) BOOL someBool;
// a few method declarations
#end
SomeClass.m
#implementation SomeClass
#synthesize someBool = _someBool;
// the method implementations
#end
Now the new and improved way with the modern Objective-C compiler:
SomeClass.h
#interface SomeClass : UIViewController
#property (nonatomic, assign) BOOL someBool;
// a few method declarations
#end
SomeClass.m
#interface SomeClass () <UITextFieldDelegate>
#end
#implementation SomeClass {
UITextField *_textField;
}
// the method implementations
#end
The new way has several advantages. The primary advantage is that none of the implementation specific details about the class appear in the .h file. A client has no need to know what delegates the implementation needs. The client has no need to know what ivars I use. Now, if the implementation needs a new ivar or it needs to use a new protocol, the .h file doesn't change. This mean less code gets recompiled. It cleaner and much more efficient. It also makes for easier editing. When I'm editing the .m file and realize I need a new ivar, make the change in the same .m file I'm already editing. No need to swap back and forth.
Also note the implementation no longer needs an ivar or #synthesize for the property.
What you probably want (unless you're using a very old OS and compiler) is to just use property syntax. I.e.:
#interface MyClass : NSObject
// method declarations here ...
#property (copy) NSString* myVar;
// ... or here.
#end
This will do what you intended to do. This will implicitly synthesize an instance variable and a getter/setter pair for this variable. If you manually wanted to create the instance variable (you generally don't need that unless you need your code to work on very old MacOS versions), this is what the above code does under the hood to create the ivar:
#interface MyClass : NSObject
{
NSString* _myVar;
}
// method declarations here.
#end
Note the curly braces, which tell the compiler that this is not just a global variable somewhere in between the methods, but actually an instance variable that belongs to this object.
If you are creating the property only for internal use and don't want clients of your class to mess with it, you can hide this away a little bit in everything but the oldest ObjC compilers by using a class extension which "continues" the class declaration from the header, but can be placed separate from it (so usually in your implementation file). A class extension looks like a category without a name:
#interface MyClass ()
#property (copy) NSString* myVar;
#end
And you can either put your property declaration in there, or even ivar declarations (again wrapped in curly brackets). You can even declare the same property as readonly in the class interface, and then re-declare it identical, but as readwrite in the extension, so that clients only read it, but your code can change it.
Note that, if you didn't use ARC (that is, you've switched off the default of Automatic Reference Counting), you would have to set all your properties to nil in your dealloc method (unless they're set to weak or assign of course).
NB - All the above are #interface sections. Your actual code will go in separate #implementation sections. This is so you can have header files (.h) you can hand off to your class's clients that just contain the portions you intend them to use, and hide away implementation details in the implementation file (.m) where you can change them without having to worry someone might have accidentally used them and you'll break other code.
PS - Note that NSStrings and other objects that you want the immutable flavor of, but that also exist in a mutable flavor (i.e. NSMutableString) should always be copy properties, because that will turn an NSMutableString into an NSString so that nobody on the outside can change the mutable string underneath you. For all other object types, you generally use strong (or retain if not ARC). For your class's owner (e.g. its delegate) you usually use weak (or assign if not ARC).
In Java
MyClass {
String myVar;
MyClass() {
// constructor
}
}
In Objective-c
MyClass.h
#interface MyClass : NSObject{
NSString* str; // Declaration
}
#end
MyClass.m
#implementation MyClass
-(void)initializieTheString
{
//Defination
}
#end
In objective-c, you define the variable as private by doing like so
MyClass.h
#interface MyClass : NSObject{
NSString* _myTestVar; // Declaration
}
#end
and refer to it in the implementation class by doing like so
MyClass.m
#import "MyClass.h";
#implementation MyClass
-(void)initializieTheString
{
_myTestVar= #"foo"; //Initialization
}
#end
I'm working on building an iOS 6 app.
I have a class TDBeam which inherits from superclass TDWeapon.
The superclass TDWeapon declares a #property in the TDWeapon.h file:
#interface TDWeapon : UIView
#property (nonatomic) int damage;
#end
I do not explicitly #synthesize the property, as I'm letting Xcode automatically do so.
In the subclass TDBeam I override the getter in the TDBeam.m file:
#import "TDBeam.h"
#implementation TDBeam
- (int)damage {
return _damage;
}
#end
Xcode auto-completes the getter method name, as expected. But when I attempt to reference the _damage instance variable (inherited from the superclass), I get a compiler error:
Use of undeclared identifier '_damage'
What am I doing wrong here? I've tried explicitly adding #synthesize, and changing the name of the _damage ivar, but the compiler doesn't "see" it or any other ivars from the superclass. I thought ivars were visible and accessible from subclasses?
Synthesized ivars are not visible to subclasses, whether they are explicitly or automatically created: What is the visibility of #synthesized instance variables? Since they are effectively declared in the implementation file, their declaration isn't included in the "translation unit" that includes the subclass.
If you really want to access that ivar directly, you'll have to explicitly declare it (in its default "protected" form) somewhere that the subclass can see it, such as a class extension of the superclass in a private header.
There are a lot of posts on this topic on Stack Overflow, none of which offer simple concrete advice, but this topic sums it up most succinctly, and Josh's answer is the best in any.
What he kinda stops short of saying outright, is, if this is the kind of thing you want to do, don't use #property at all. Declare your regular protected variable in your base class as he says, and write you're own setters and getters if you need them. The ivar will be visible to any subclasses who can then write their own setters/getters.
At least that's where i've landed on the issue, although I'd a total newb to subclassing.
The idea of creating private headers to host your anonymous category and re-#sythesizing your ivars in your subclass just seems wrong on so many levels. I'm also sure I've probably missed some fundamental point somewhere.
Edit
Okay after some lost sleep, and inspired by Stanford's 2013 iTunes U course, here I believe is an example solution to this problem.
MYFoo.h
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#interface MYFoo : NSObject
// Optional, depending on your class
#property (strong, nonatomic, readonly) NSString * myProperty;
- (NSString *)makeValueForNewMyProperty; //override this in your subclass
#end
MYFoo.m
#import "MYFoo.h"
#interface MYFoo ()
#property (strong, nonatomic, readwrite) NSString * myProperty;
#end
#implementation MYFoo
// Base class getter, generic
- (NSDateComponents *)myProperty {
if (!_myProperty) {
_myProperty = [self makeValueForNewMyProperty];
}
return _myProperty;
}
// Replace this method in your subclass with your logic on how to create a new myProperty
- (NSString *)makeValueForNewMyProperty {
// If this is an abstract base class, we'd return nil and/or throw an exception
NSString * newMyProperty = [[NSString alloc]init];
// Do stuff to make the property the way you need it...
return newMyProperty;
}
#end
Then you just replace makeValueForNewMyProperty in your subclass with whatever custom logic you need. Your property is 'protected' in the base class but you have control over how it is created, which is basically what you are trying to achieve in most cases.
If your makeValueForNewMyProperty method requires access to other ivars of the base class, they will, at the very least, have to be be public readonly properties (or just naked ivars).
Not exactly 'over-ridding a getter' but it achieves the same sort of thing, with a little thought. My apologies if, in trying to make the example generic, some elegance and clarity has been lost.
I read some tutorials here about properties ,but i still have some doubts to clarify, is there a difference between
#interface MyClass : NSObject {
}
#property(nonatomic,retain) NSString *temp;
#end
AND
#interface MyClass : NSObject {
NSString *temp;
}
#property(nonatomic,retain) NSString *temp;
#end
The difference is that in the first version, the compiler will automatically create an instance variable (IIRC, it will be named _temp but I don't know for sure). This is only supported on iOS and Mac 64 bit.
In the second example, you provide the variable.
There's actually a way to tell the compiler which variable to use for the property, which I use a lot:
#interface MyClass : NSObject {
NSString *temp_;
}
#property(nonatomic,retain) NSString *temp;
#end
#implementation MyClass
#synthesize temp = temp_;
#end
This way the variable and the property have different names and you can't confuse them (e.g. by forgetting to prefix self.).
Minor side-note: it's often desirable to use copy instead of retain for NSString *, since you might assign an NSMutableString * to the property. Now if you would change that mutable string unexpected things might happen.
Does the first one even work? If there is no instance variable its a bit hard to have a property to access it.
#properties are meant for you, so you can be lazy, they write the following 2 methods for you ( if not set to readonly ):
- (void)setYourVariable:(id)new;
- (id)yourVariable;
it also allows you to use "someClass.itsVariable;" instead of "[someClass itsVariable];"
Another thing, when you create your header files make sure that the biggest variables ( like pointers ) are on the top and the smallest on the bottom, this saves ram.
thus:
NSObject *someObject;
NSObject *someOtherObject;
int anInt;
short aShort;
BOOL fakeBool;
instead of:
BOOL fakeBool;
NSObject *someObject;
short aShort;
NSObject *someOtherObject;
int anInt;
This has to do with the compiler, you can check this by using sizeof()
In the modern runtime (Objective-C 2.0) it is the same because the compiler will generate the variable for you. See Question about #synthesize
Quoting The Objective-C Programming Language > Declared Properties > Property Implementation Directives:
There are differences in the behavior of accessor synthesis that
depend on the runtime:
For the legacy runtimes, instance variables must already be declared in the #interface block of the current class. If an instance
variable of the same name as the property exists, and if its type is
compatible with the property’s type, it is used—otherwise, you get a
compiler error.
For the modern runtimes, instance variables are synthesized as needed. If an instance variable of the same name already exists, it is
used.
The practical difference that I've found is that the debugger doesn't appear to show you the value of properties, just instance variables.
Therefore, your first example, which (assuming you use the #synthesize directive to create your getter/setter) automatically creates the ivar, will not have a value that you can easily retrieve during debug. You'll end up having to send a lot of NSLog messages, rather than just looking at the values while stepping through your code.
As an aside, which seems to relate to this topic, I typically prepend my ivars with "iv" and change my color settings in XCode preferences so that I'm never unsure whether I'm accessing a property or an ivar.
Example
#interface MyClass : NSObject {
NSString *ivName;
NSString *ivTitle;
}
#property (nonatomic, copy) NSString *Name;
#property (nonatomic, copy) NSString *Title;
#end
Now, this then requires a small trick (to tie the two together) when synthesizing the properties, which I show below:
#implementation MyClass
#synthesize Name = ivName;
#synthesize Title = ivTitle;
This way, it's always very easy for me to know exactly what's going on at a glance. Yes, context can also tell you whether you're accessing an ivar/property, but why not make it easier?