Presume I have an Object, an instance of MyClass. In Objective-C one can ask the Object to "perform" a selector by either sending it a message or using NSObject's "perform".
This selector has to be defined at compile time as part of the Class definition, more precisely as an Instance method of that class OR with the help of the Obj-C Runtime, have the method added to the (entire) MyClass at runtime with class_addMethod.
My question is as follows:
Would it be possible to send an object the IMP and ask it to execute it on itself? Essentially I want Objects, different instances of MyClass to execute things on themselves without the entire MyClass knowing about it. Essentially I would call these "per Object methods", an Object1 gets this IMP executed on itself then another Object2 gets a different IMP, and so on. These IMPs are stored somewhere else and it's that Object that knows and decides where to send things.
yes that works
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#import <objc/runtime.h>
#interface DonorTemplateClass : NSObject
- (void)testMethod:(NSString*)aStringAsParameter;
#end
#implementation DonorTemplateClass
- (void) testMethod:(NSString*)aStringAsParameter {
NSLog(#"%# :: %#", self.class, aStringAsParameter);
}
#end
#interface AClass : NSObject
#end
#implementation AClass
#end
#interface AnotherClass : NSObject
#end
#implementation AnotherClass
#end
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
#autoreleasepool {
SEL justTheMethodSelector = #selector(testMethod:);
IMP justTheMethodImplementation = class_getMethodImplementation([DonorTemplateClass class], justTheMethodSelector);
AClass *anAClassInstance = [[AClass alloc] init];
AnotherClass *anotherClassInstance = [[AnotherClass alloc] init];
NSString *aString = #"Test1";
typedef void (*MyTypeName)(id,SEL, NSString*); // more info about the block syntax on http://goshdarnblocksyntax.com scroll down to "typedef"
MyTypeName blockName = (MyTypeName)justTheMethodImplementation;
blockName(anAClassInstance, justTheMethodSelector, aString);
blockName(anotherClassInstance, justTheMethodSelector, aString);
}
}
NOTE that I cast my IMP to a typedef'd pointer type. it compiles fine when I just call I but objc_retain crashes then for me ... so I'd say you need to typedef your IMPs before using them but then you can execute them in the context of any suitable class
IMP is just a typedef for a regular C function pointer. It's meant to point to method implementations, which are C functions with first parameter being an object, and second parameter being a selector. And "an Object to execute an IMP" simply means to call the C function, passing the object as first argument, and a selector as second.
You said you want to be able to "send an object the IMP and ask it to execute it on itself" (i.e. call the IMP passing the object and a selector), yet you do not want "the entire MyClass knowing about it" (which I take to mean you do not want it as a method).
So basically, that sounds like you just want a bunch of standalone C functions, not methods, which you can call, passing various objects, as needed. And you can store these C function pointers as you like. Is that right?
Related
In this tutorial here: http://www.raywenderlich.com/62989/introduction-c-ios-developers-part-1
It mentions that for Objective-C:
Even if you only declare a method inside the implementation of a
class, and don’t expose it in the interface, you technically could
still call that method externally.
How is this done?
There are a lot of ways.
For example, as long as a compatible method is declared somewhere, you can call it normally with dynamic typing. Here's a demonstration:
// MyClass.h
#interface MyClass : NSObject
#end
// MyClass.m
#interface MyClass()
- (void)addObject;
#end
#implementation MyClass
- (void)addObject:(id)object {
NSLog(#"Whoa, I got called!");
}
#end
// main.m
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#import "MyClass.h"
int main() {
id something = [[MyClass alloc] init];
[something addObject:#"Look ma, no errors!"];
return 0;
}
Since there is a known method named addObject: that takes an object, and id variables are dynamically typed, this is 100% valid and will call MyClass's addObject: method.
They could even get it with a statically typed variable and a method that isn't known by declaring the method in a category. A few other options:
using performSelector: as #michaels showed in his answer
going straight to objc_msgSend()
getting the method IMP and calling it directly.
You can use the performSelector: method of NSObject, though the compiler will give you a warning if the selector is not publicly declared anywhere
[someObject performSelector:#selector(someMethod)];
I have some existing code I'm modifying from another developer. They have a static NSString declared as follows...
static NSString *myStaticString;
This string should be initialized before use. What I'm looking to do is have a property method overriden which will ensure the variable is set. Here's what my suggested layout would look like...
static NSString *myStaticString;
#interface MyClass ()
#property (readonly) NSString *myProperty;
#end
#implementation MyClass
+(NSString *)myProperty
{
if (!myStaticString)
myStaticString = [#"My string value!" retain];
return myStaticString;
}
#end
The new thing for me here is I've never declared a getter as a static method and to be honest I don't know if that is a good idea or not.
In answer to the question (and I paraphrase) "is it ok to have getters return a pointer to a static?" the answer is yes, it is.
The issue here is, though, that getters are instance methods, and you've defined a class method. So you'll end up with a confusing combination of your explicitly defined class method that happens to bear the same name of an automatically synthesized getter instance method (and, worse, that synthesized getter instance method will just be returning a pointer to some automatically synthesized ivar, which is obviously not what you intended). Bottom line, you are not overriding the getter like you obviously thought you were.
As bbum pointed out, you can easily remedy this by defining this explicitly declared method as an instance method. By doing that, you will thereby be overriding the getter, accomplishing what you probably intended.
Personally, since there's nothing here that requires an instance method, I might be inclined to just retire the property altogether and have the class method return a pointer to the string referenced by your static variable. In that case, I'd suggest one of two approaches:
If the string is truly a constant, then I might do something like:
// MyClass.h
#interface MyClass : NSObject
+ (NSString *)someString;
#end
and
// MyClass.m
#import "MyClass.h"
static NSString * const kSomeInternalConstant = #"my string";
#implementation MyClass
+ (NSString *)someString
{
return kSomeInternalConstant;
}
#end
If the string is defined at runtime, but does not change while the app is running, then I'd replace the MyClass.m with:
// MyClass.m
#import "MyClass.h"
#implementation MyClass
+ (NSString *)someString
{
static NSString *someInternalString = nil;
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
someInternalString = ... // set it to be whatever you want
});
return someInternalString;
}
#end
Clearly, replace these variable names with something more logical, but hopefully this illustrates the idea.
If you're looking for the class-level equivalent of #property, then the answer is "there's no such thing". But remember, #property is only syntactic sugar, anyway; it just creates appropriately-named object methods.
You still can use class methods that access static variables which have only a slightly different syntax.
Here's thread safe example:
// Foo.h
#interface Foo {
}
+(NSDictionary*) dictionary;
// Foo.m
+(NSDictionary*) dictionary
{
static NSDictionary* fooDict = nil;
static dispatch_once_t oncePredicate;
dispatch_once(&oncePredicate, ^{
// create dict
});
return fooDict;
}
You need it to be an instance method:
-(NSString *)myProperty
{
if (!myStaticString)
myStaticString = [#"My string value!" retain];
return myStaticString;
}
And, yes, that is fine.
• The retain is odd; don't need it, doesn't hurt. Best turn on ARC and be done with it.
• I'd move the static into the method or, if it never changes, just return #"My string value!" directly.
• This is not an uncommon pattern; this class may return a default, static, value and subclasses might override to return a different value, as necessary.
• When initializing a static, use dispatch_once. In this case, it doesn't matter as it is an assignment of a static constant string. But, like the retain, best to follow convention (i.e. eliminate the retain, use dispatch_once or just return the value directly).
I google this question and spend some time to figure it out by myself but with a bad luck.
I need to call class's static method which is hidden for class's user.
// MyClass.h
#interface MyClass : NSObject
#end
// MyClass.m
#implementation MyClass
- (NSString *)myInstanceMethod
{
return #"result string";
}
+ (NSString *)myStaticMethod
{
return #"result string";
}
#end
------------------------------------------------------------
// MyCallerClass.m
#import "MyClass.h"
#implementation MyCallerClass
- (void) testMethod
{
MyClass *inst = [MyClass new];
// call 1
NSString *resultInstance = [inst performSelector:#selector(myInstanceMethod)];
// call 2
NSString *resultStaitc = [inst performSelector:#selector(myStaticMethod)];
// call
[MyClass myStaticMethod];
}
#end
Call 1 works good, Call 2 returns nil, Call 3 does not compile.
How can I call static method which does not defined in .h file and give correct returned object?
Thank in advance,
Rost
For Call 2 ,
since it is an class method you should call like
NSString *resultStaitc = [[inst class] performSelector:#selector(myStaticMethod)];
inst is the object.To call a class method you must call with class.
The object instance's class is supposed to be calling the method, not the instance itself.
For call 3
It should be working fine,The result value is never used .the compile error is because
+ (NSString *)myStaticMethod;
not declared in .h
use
NSString *resultStaitc1 =[MyClass myStaticMethod];
and it will return the value to the resultStaitc1
Another option is to declare an informal protocol for MyClass at the top of MyCallerClass.m. An informal protocol is just a category interface without the implementation block. You can stick you method declaration(s) in there. It does raise synchronisation problems between the two source files, but so does performSelector:. Doing it this way lets you call methods that have a different signature to just take [0-2] object arguments and return and object.
I am trying to create a custom object that simply inherits the NSString class and overrides the 'description' method.
When I compile, however, I am getting a warning:
Incompatible pointer types initializing 'OverrideTester *' with an expression of type 'NSString *'
Here is my code:
main.m
#import <Foundation/NSObject.h>
#import <Foundation/NSString.h>
#import <Foundation/NSAutoreleasePool.h>
#import "OverrideTester.h"
int main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
NSAutoreleasePool * pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
NSString *str = #"Programming is fun";
OverrideTester *strOverride = #"Overriding is fun";
NSLog (#"%#", str);
NSLog (#"%#", strOverride);
[pool drain];
return 0;
}
OverrideTester.h
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#interface OverrideTester : NSString
-(void) description;
#end
OverrideTester.m
#import "OverrideTester.h"
#implementation OverrideTester
-(void) description
{
NSLog(#"DESCRIPTION!\n");
}
#end
NSString is part of a class cluster. You cannot just create arbitrary subclasses of it, and when you do, you can't assign constant strings to them (which are type NXConstantString). See Subclassing Notes in the NSString documentation. Generally you don't want to subclass NSString. There are better solutions for most problems.
you are assigning an instance of NSString to your variable of type OverrideTester. If you want an instance of your class, you need to instantiate an instance of that class; type-casting will never change the class of an instance.
description is defined as returning an NSString*:
- (NSString *)description;
Do not try to learn about subclassing and overriding methods by subclassing NSString (or any other class cluster). If you want to play with subclassing and such -- a very good idea when new to the language, assuredly -- then subclass NSObject, potentially multiple levels , and play there.
How do you mean to subclass NSObject,
potentially multiple levels? Isn't it
possible NSObject might have
conflicting methods compared to other
class clusters or just not have them
available to override?
If your goal is to figure out how method overrides work (which I thought it was), then you'd be better off doing it entirely yourself.
I may have mis-read your question.
In any case, subclassing NSString is pretty much never done. There are very very few cases where it is useful. Overriding description in anything but custom classes specifically for debugging purposes is useful, yes. Calling description in production code should never be done.
Also, why would description return an
NSString* in this code?
What would happen if something that expects an NSString* return value were to call your version that doesn't return anything?
A crash.
You are declaring a variable named strOverride of type pointer to OverrideTester. But to that variable, you are trying to assign a pointer to an NSString. You cannot assign a superclass to a variable of a subclass. Imagine a generic class TwoWheeled and a derived class Motorbike. A Motorbike can be treated like a TwoWheeled, but not the other way round as the Motorbike has features a normal TwoWheeled might not have like a motor.
While attempting my first sub-class in Objective-C I have come across the following warning which I cannot seem to resolve. The call to decimalNumberWithMantissa gives a warning of "initialization from distinct Objective-C type".
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#interface NSDecimalNumberSub : NSDecimalNumber {
}
#end
#implementation NSDecimalNumberSub
#end
int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
NSDecimalNumberSub *ten = [NSDecimalNumberSub
decimalNumberWithMantissa:10
exponent:0
isNegative:NO];
}
Does a class method have to be treated differently with a sub-class? Am I missing something simple? Any help would be appreciated.
NSDecimalNumber defines the decimalNumberWithMantissa:... method to return an NSDecimalNumber, so you're going to get back an instance of the base class and not your custom subclass. You'll have to create your own convenience method to return an instance of your subclass, or just alloc and initialize it another way.
If you're writing your own class you can define a convenience method like that to return type id, and then use [[self alloc] init] when creating the instance to make your class safe for subclassing.