Wow, great issue I have found for myself.
What is it? The candy or the garlic?
something about Objective-C:
Are there any issues not to use 'self' in (+) - class methods as class?
in the deep of a class...
+(NSDate*)dateWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)interval {
return [self dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:interval];
}
Ruby here:
For example, in Ruby everything is object and class is object of class Class and there is a good practice to rely on self:
class DateClass
# self is DateClass here, inside of class definition, uh
self.dateWithTimeInterval(interval)
self.dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970(interval)
end
end
Perl here:
Another example was found in perl oop deep: (thanks for this thread)
sub new {
my $proto = shift || die "Must pass a class or object into new()";
my $class = ref($proto) || $proto;
bless {}, $class;
}
So, in Perl and in Ruby guys always rely on $class refs
Maybe example with Perl code not obvious, but it happens all time. Programmers rely on $class reference and take class name with it. also, they can invoke some methods with it:
my $class = 'Class';
$class->new();
or
Class::->new()
After all...
Which pitfalls or caveats could you provide against usage self as class in objective-c?
Usually you use self whenever you can but of course, there are situations when referencing the class by [MyClass class] is desired. Almost all of the scenarios are related to inheritance.
For example, a creator method for a class A.
#implementation A
+ (id)createInstanceWithParam:(NSInteger)param {
return [[self alloc] initWithParam:param];
}
#end
Will work correctly even if we create a subclass B. However, if we decide to implement a class cluster, then we have to reference classes by names:
#implementation SomeDataStructure
+ (id)createInstanceWithType:(NSInteger)type {
if (type == 0) {
return [[DataStructureImpl1 alloc] init];
}
else if (type == 1) {
return [[DataStructureImpl2 alloc] init];
}
}
#end
Another example is the common example of +initialize
+ (void)initialize {
if (self == [MyClass class]) {
...perform initialization...
}
}
And of course, if you are overriding a method, then using self or using [MySelf class] can be a distinction between your overriden implementation and the original implementation. Although super could be used there, too.
TLDR:
self is preferred but be careful with subclasses/superclasses.
For understanding pros and cons of using self vs. class name let's consider one situation:
Class A is subclass of NSDate and implements method +(NSDate*)dateWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)interval.
Class B is subclass of A and overrides implementation of +dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:(NSTimeInterval)interval method that declared in NSDate.
Now let's consider two possible implementations of +(NSDate*)dateWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)interval method in A:
1. Using self
+(NSDate*)dateWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)interval {
return [self dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:interval];
}
if run [B dateWithTimeInterval:interval]; then self in above code is kind of B class and as expected custom implementation (in class B) for +(NSDate*)dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:(NSTimeInterval)interval method would be called.
2. Using directly NSDate
+(NSDate*)dateWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)interval {
return [NSDate dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:interval];
}
if run [B dateWithTimeInterval:interval]; then overridden implementation (in class B) would be ignored and instead of it: original implementation (in class NSDate) for +(NSDate*)dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:(NSTimeInterval)interval method would be called. It's so because we directly send message to NSDate: [NSDate dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:interval];.
This behavior is unexpected for developer.
For the same reason declare methods in such way:
+(instancetype)dateWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)interval {
return [self dateWithTimeIntervalSince1970:interval];
}
By using instancetype compiler will know what kind of object is returned by method-initializer. When you call [B dateWithTimeInterval:interval] it returns object of kind B but not NSDate.
Related
I have the following method:
- (FDModel *)_modelForClass: (Class)modelClass
withIdentifier: (NSString *)identifier
which should take in a Class and a identifier, create an instance of modelClass, assign the identifier and do some other work based on the fact that it assumed modelClass is a subclass of FDModel.
I can put in a check that raises some error or exception if [modelClass isSubclassOfClass: [FDModel class]] == NO but I was trying to see if there was a way to enforce this at compile time.
EDIT: I understand that some people see this as a obvious factory method but the modelClass parameter is actually passed in by the user of my library through a delegate callback - (Class<FDModel>)modelClassForDictionary: (NSDictionary *)dictionary;. This question was more aimed at making the user of my library return a Class that has a specific subclass.
I would consider the plain answer to your question being no; there is no way of checking if a class passed as a parameter is of a certain kind.
But I'd like to argue that the essence of your question primarily points to a design issue, i.e. can't your instance-generating method be expressed as a factory method? Like so:
#interface FDModel
+ (instancetype)modelWithIdentifier:(NSString *)identifier;
#end
In the above case you would simply do:
[FDModel modelWithIdentifier:anIdentifier];
The actual class returned (and the initialisation logic) being specified by the factory method implementation through subclassing of the FDModel class:
#implementation FDModelSubclass
+ (instancetype)modelWithIdentifier:(NSString *)identifier
{
FDModel *model = [super modelWithIdentifier:identifier];
if (model)
{
// do additional init stuff
}
return model;
}
#end
Nothing to check, no chance to go wrong.
After some research I don't think you can do it at compile time - you have to do it at runtime as you expected.
BOOL classConformsToProtocol = [class conformsToProtocol:#protocol(OKAProtocol)];
OR
BOOL classConformsToProtocol = [self class:[OKAClass class] conformsToProtocol:#"OKAProtocol"];
------
- (BOOL)class:(Class)class conformsToProtocol:(NSString *)protocol;
{
return [class conformsToProtocol:NSProtocolFromString(protocol)];
}
I did try to google this, but actually found nothing. Coming from a strong Smalltalk background, I thought the following would be fine:
#import "ValveTargetState.h"
- (id) targetStateClass {
return ValveTargetState;
}
- (void) targetIsActive:(BOOL)isActive {
self.targetState = [[[self targetStateClass] alloc] initValve: self isActive: isActive];
[self.targetState push];
}
Basically, I've added a method, so that subclasses can tune what the targetStateClass is used. It was my understanding, that like Smalltalk, classes are objects too in ObjC. But Xcode tells me
Unexpected interface name 'ValveTargetState': expected expression
(for the return ValveTargetState; expression)
I think I'm missing something obvious, but what is it?
Try this:
- (Class)targetStateClass
{
return [ValveTargetState class];
}
Assuming that ValveTargetState is a class that inherits ultimately from NSObject, either
[ValveTargetState class]
or
[ValveTargetState self]
will give you the pointer to the class object for ValveTargetState.
It would be much better to use ValveTargetState directly, but unfortunately the name of a class is not a valid expression in Objective-C.
Suppose I have a class BasicDate, and a subclass of BasicDate called EuroDate. The difference between the classes is month-day-year versus day-month-year. I know it'd probably be better to just have methods on the same class to output them differently... but that's not the point of this question.
BasicDate has the following init method:
-(id)initWithMonth:(int)m andDay:(int)d andYear:(int)y {
if(self = [super init]) { /*initialize*/ } return self;
}
And the matching factory method then looks like this:
+(BasicDate)dateWithMonth:(int)m andDay:(int)d andYear:(int)y {
return [[BasicDate alloc] initWithMonth: m andDay: d andYear: y];
}
But if my subclass, EuroDate which would use a factory method more like this:
+(EuroDate)dateWithDay:(int)d andMonth:(int)m andYear:(int)y {
return [[EuroDate alloc] initWithDay: d andMonth: m andYear: y];
} //we can assume that EuroDate includes this init method...
This is all fine. Now, we assume that both classes have their own description method, which will print MMDDYYYY for BasicDate, but DDMMYYYY with EuroDate. This is still all fine.
But if I do this:
EuroDate today = [EuroDate dateWithMonth:10 andDay:18 andYear:2013];
This will call the BasicDate factory method that EuroDate has inherited. The problem is, remember how BasicDate's factory method looks? return [[BasicDate alloc] ...]
So today polymorphs into a BasicDate despite me wanting to store it as a EuroDate, so if I call the description method, it will print 10182013 rather than 18102013.
There are two solutions to this problem I have found.
Solution 1: Change BasicDate's factory method. Rather than return [[BasicDate alloc] ..., I can instead do return [[[self class] alloc] ...] This works and will allow me to use this method for BasicDate or any of BasicDate's subclasses and it will return the right object type.
Solution 2: Override the factory method. Whether I override it to throw an exception or override it to do return [[EuroDate alloc] ...]. The problem with overriding it is that I have to override every factory method for every subclass.
Which is better? What are some downsides to the two possible solutions that I may be missing? What is considered the standard way of handling this issue in Objective C?
You should generally use [[[self class] alloc] init...] in factory methods to ensure that they create instances of the correct class. Note that class isn't a property (and in fact, there's no such thing as a 'class property') so the use of dot syntax there is inappropriate.
Edit
And as pointed out by #ArkadiuszHolko (and Rob, thanks), you should now use instancetype rather than id for the return value, to get the benefits of strong typing while maintaining type flexibility for subclasses. And by the way, Apple's naming conventions suggest avoiding using the word 'and' in method names. So consider rewriting your convenience method like so:
+ (instancetype)dateWithMonth:(int)month day:(int)day year:(int)year
{
return [[self alloc] initWithMonth:month day:day year:year];
}
I am aware of NSStringFromClass.
My question relates to the situation where the same method is implemented in multiple classes in an inheritance tree, and you want to debugging information as to which class it is executing from.
Example:
Let us have three classes: A-->B-->C , inheriting as displayed by the arrows.
If each of them has a method foo(), defined:
-(void) foo
{
// Do some work particular to the class it is in.
.....
//Each method ends with the debugging statement:
NSLog("In foo of class:%$",NSClassFromString([self class]));
}
The problem occurs when foo of Class B, calls [super foo]. When [super foo] (i.e. Class A) reaches the NSLog statement, [self class] returns class B, and not A.
Likewise if C called [super foo], the log statement in super would log class C.
What I want to do, is output the class whose method implementation is being executed - so if class B calls [super foo], then the log statement in [A foo] outputs Class A.
The simple way is to replace NSClassFromString with a hardcoded string representing the class name, but I was wondering if there is a better way to do this ?
You can use __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ to include both the class and the method name:
NSLog(#"Greetings from %s", __PRETTY_FUNCTION__);
I don't believe that there is a compiler-time macro for just the class name.
There might not be a macro for class, but there is __FILE__ and __LINE__ macros in the C language. They expand to the current file and line number. You can use them in NSLog. I use __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ when I remember it, but I remember __FILE__ and __LINE__ more.
Example:
NSLog( #"%s %d", __FILE__, __LINE__ );
Remember that __FILE__ isn’t an Objective-C string.
The problem occurs when foo of Class B, calls [super foo]. When [super
foo] (i.e. Class A) reaches the NSLog statement, [self class] returns
class B, and not A.
Sure. That's because self points to an object, and that object's class doesn't change just because you call a method of the superclass.
The simple way is to replace NSClassFromString with a hardcoded string
representing the class name, but I was wondering if there is a better
way to do this?
As others have pointed out, you can use a macro like __PRETTY_FUNCTION__, but I think the simple and obvious approach is the best. You know the name of the class when you're writing the code, so you can write:
NSLog("In foo of class: %#", #"ClassA");
Each of your classes has its own implementation of your method, so each one can print its own class name in the message. Something like __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ is useful when you're writing a debug macro that you're going to use in multiple functions. That's not the case here. Using the obvious approach makes it that much easier to see what's going on, and that's important during debugging (which I assume is what you're trying to do here).
i think you would have to walk up the class hierarchy using class_getSuperclass and class_getInstanceMethod, comparing differences in the methods. do that to determine the objc class, then use class_getName or NSStringFromClass to get its name.
This would look something like:
NSString* MONClassNameWhichImplementsMethod(id Self, SEL cmd);
and
- (void)method
{
NSLog(#"%# - %#",
MONGetClassWhichImplementsMethod(self, _cmd),
NSStringFromSelector(_cmd)
);
}
and
// NOT COMPILED -- FOR ILLUSTRATION ONLY
Class MONClassWhichImplementsMethod(Class cls, SEL cmd) {
assert(cls && cmd && "srsly?");
Class super = class_getSuperclass(cls);
Method m1 = class_getInstanceMethod(cls, cmd);
assert(m1 && "srsly?");
Method m2 = class_getInstanceMethod(super, cmd);
if (0 == m2) {
return cls;
}
else if (m1 != m2) {
return cls;
}
else {
return MONClassWhichImplementsMethod(super, cmd);
}
}
NSString* MONClassNameWhichImplementsMethod(id Self, SEL cmd) {
return NSStringFromClass(MONClassNameWhichImplementsMethod(Self.class, cmd));
}
if it blows up from deep recursion, you've another problem.
I'm going to create a base class that implements very similar functions for all of the subclasses. This was answered in a different question. But what I need to know now is if/how I can cast various functions (in the base class) to return the subclass object. This is both for a given function but also a function call in it.
(I'm working with CoreData by the way)
As a function within the base class (this is from a class that is going to become my subclass)
+(Structure *)fetchStructureByID:(NSNumber *)structureID inContext:(NSManagedObjectContext *)managedObjectContext {...}
And as a function call within a given function:
Structure *newStructure = [Structure fetchStructureByID:[currentDictionary objectForKey:#"myId"]];
inContext:managedObjectContext];
Structure is one of my subclasses, so I need to rewrite both of these so that they are "generic" and can be applied to other subclasses (whoever is calling the function).
How do I do that?
Update: I just realized that in the second part there are actually two issues. You can't change [Structure fetch...] to [self fetch...] because it is a class method, not an instance method. How do I get around that too?
If I understand your question correctly I believe the key is the [self class] idiom.
As far as your update goes requesting a way to call a class method on the current class you can use [self class]. As in:
Structure *newStructure = [[self class] fetchStructureByID:[currentDictionary
objectForKey:#"myId"]];
inContext:managedObjectContext];
EDIT: I redid this to return id per #rpetrich's comment -- much cleaner and avoids the need for -isKindOfClass: as long as you're sure of the type of the instance you're calling -createConfiguredObject on.
As for the first part, you could just return an id (pointer to any object) and document that it will return an instance of the same class it's called upon. Then in the code you need to use [self class] anywhere you instantiate a new object in a method.
e.g. if you have a -createConfiguredObject method which returns an instance of the same class it's called on, it would be implemented as follows:
// Returns an instance of the same class as the instance it was called on.
// This is true even if the method was declared in a base class.
-(id) createConfiguredObject {
Structure *newObject = [[[self class] alloc] init];
// When this method is called on a subclass newObject is actually
// an instance of that subclass
// Configure newObject
return newObject;
}
You can then use this in code as follows:
StructureSubclass *subclass = [[[StructureSubclass alloc] init] autorelease];
subclass.name = #"subclass";
// No need to cast or use isKindOfClass: here because returned object is of type id
// and documented to return instance of the same type.
StructureSubclass *configuredSubclass = [[subclass createConfiguredObject] autorelease];
configuredSubclass.name = #"configuredSubclass";
For reference, what I was referring to with -isKindOfClass: and casting to the proper subclass is as follows:
Structure *structure;
// Do stuff
// I believe structure is now pointing to an object of type StructureSubclass
// and I want to call a method only present on StructureSubclass.
if ([structure isKindOfClass:[StrucutreSubclass class]]) {
// It is indeed of type StructureSubclass (or a subclass of same)
// so cast the pointer to StructureSubclass *
StructureSubclass *subclass = (StructureSubclass *)structure;
// the name property is only available on StructureSubclass.
subclass.name = #"myname";
} else {
NSLog(#"structure was not an instance of StructureSubclass when it was expected it would be.");
// Handle error
}