Let's say that I declare property in following way:
#property(nonatomic, strong, getter = isWorking) BOOL working;
Then instead of having the property to be synthesized I write the getter myself (and add some custom logic to it).
What will happen if I access the property in following way:
BOOL work = self.working;
Is the getter (and my custom logic there) still called or is it called only when I access the property using getter explicitly (BOOL work = self.isWorking;) ?
Oops. Just tried it. Apparently i use dot notation too much, and didn't realize just how much it was doing. :P
#import "NSObject.h"
#include <stdio.h>
#interface Test : NSObject
#property (getter=myStuff) int stuff;
#end
#implementation Test
-(int)myStuff { return 42; }
-(void)setStuff:(int)value { /* don't care */ }
#end
int main() {
#autoreleasepool {
Test* test = [[Test alloc] init];
/* All these work... */
printf("test.stuff == %d\n", test.stuff);
printf("[test myStuff] == %d\n", [test myStuff]);
printf("test.myStuff == %d\n", test.myStuff);
/* but here, there's an exception */
printf("[test stuff] == %d\n", [test stuff]);
return 0;
}
}
When i compile this (using clang in Linux), there are two warnings about the oddness of a missing -(int)stuff. And the output looks like
chao#chao-VirtualBox:~/code/objc$ ./a.out
test.stuff == 42
[test myStuff] == 42
test.myStuff == 42
: Uncaught exception NSInvalidArgumentException, reason: -[Test stuff]: unrecognized selector sent to instance 0x2367f38
chao#chao-VirtualBox:~/code/objc$
So, umm, yeah. Disregard half of the stuff below. :P
self.working is just syntactic sugar for [self working] (or [self setWorking:value] if you're assigning to it). Either one will do the same thing: return the value of [self isWorking], because that's the getter you defined.
If you want to avoid the getter, try _working or self->_working (or whatever you named the ivar). Otherwise, self.working, [self working], and [self isWorking] (and even self.isWorking if you're feeling brave) should all give you the same result.
I have a condition where I want a view controller to conform to any of 4 protocols.
Is there a way to check if it conforms to any of these 4 protocols without doing a bunch of or statements in my if?
Can you make an array of protocols?
Sure, you can make an array of protocols:
NSArray *protocols = #[#protocol(UIApplicationDelegate),
#protocol(UIImagePickerControllerDelegate),
#protocol(UIScrollViewDelegate),
#protocol(NSFileManagerDelegate)];
You could then check that some object conforms to all of them:
UIViewController *vc = ...;
for (Protocol *protocol in protocols) {
if (![vc conformsToProtocol:protocol]) {
NSLog(#"object doesn't conform to %#", protocol);
}
}
It's hard to imagine why you'd want to do this at run-time, though.
Perhaps what you really want is to declare that something conforms to several protocols. You can do that too, and the compiler will check it for you at compile-time. For example:
#property (nonatomic, strong) id<UIApplicationDelegate, UIImagePickerController,
UIScrollViewDelegate, NSFileManagerDelegate> swissArmyKnife;
If you try to assign something to this property, and it doesn't conform to all four protocols, the compiler will issue a warning.
Perhaps what you are saying is you want to verify that an object conforms to at least one of the protocols, but that it doesn't have to conform to all of them. In that case, you have to check at run-time. But that smells like a bad design to me.
If you want to send a message to the object, but you're not sure that it will understand the message, it's probably better to check specifically for the message you want to send, instead of checking for protocol conformance.
// This is probably not such a good idea.
if ([object conformsToProtocol:#protocol(NSFileManagerDelegate)]) {
return [object fileManager:myFileManager shouldRemoveItemAtURL:url];
} else {
return arc4random_uniform(2);
}
// This is probably better.
if ([object respondsToSelector:#selector(fileManager:shouldRemoveItemAtURL:)]) {
return [object fileManager:myFileManager shouldRemoveItemAtURL:url];
} else {
return arc4random_uniform(2);
}
Sure.
id object = ...;
Protocol *protocols[] = {#protocol(Blah), #protocol(Foo), #protocol(Bar)};
for(unsigned i = 0; i < sizeof(protocols) / sizeof(Protocol *); ++i) {
if([object conformsToProtocol:protocols[i]]) {
//do something...
break;
}
}
I was messing around in Objective-C earlier, and I ran into a quite common situation:
I had a class, which was not a singleton, that needed a variable shared between method calls, like static, but each instance needed it's own variable. However, this variable only needed to be used in one particular method, we'll call it -foo.
What I'd love to do, is have a macro, let's call it ivar, which lets me do the following:
#implementation MyClass
-(foo)
{
ivar int someVal = 10; // default value, ivar scoped variable.
}
-(bar)
{
someVal = 5; // error, outside of `foo`'s scope.
}
#end
How the variable is defined does not matter to me (either a macro like OBJC_IVAR(Type, Name, Default) or ivar someType someName = value), as long as it meets the following requirements:
Has thread safety
Can have variable of same name (but different value) in another method
Type-less (doesn't matter what type the variable is)
Default Value support
Variable can be declared in one line (I shouldn't have to write 15 lines of code just to put a variable in my code)
I am currently working on an Objective-C++ implementation myself, I was just wondering if anyone else had any thoughts (or existing tools) on how to do this.
Obviously, this doesn't have to be done with a true iVar. More likely, this should be done with associated objects at run-time, which also manages deallocation for us.
After a lot of time spent, I believe I have a fully working solution in Objective-C++. Some of the features:
The variables are unique. As long as they have a different scope, their values are independent
Each instance has it's own values
Thread safety (accomplished by associated objects)
Simple variable declaration:
Macro overloading: only specify the information that you need
Possible ways to define an OBJC_IVAR:
OBJC_IVAR(); // creates a warning, does nothing
OBJC_IVAR(Name); // creates an ivar named 'Name' of type 'id'
OBJC_IVAR(Type, Name); // creates an ivar named 'Name' of type 'Type'
OBJC_IVAR(Type, Name, Default); // creates an ivar named 'Name', of type 'Type', and a default value of 'Default' (which is only executed once);
Full Type Support with C++ templates (__weak, __strong, __autoreleasing, volatile, etc. are all supported)
Subclasses do not share variables with their superclasses (so no chance for conflicts, variables really are limited to their scope).
Can be used in singletons without issue
Is fast, takes ~15-30 CPU cycles to look up a variable, and once it's looked up, takes as long as any other variable to set it.
Most of the hard work is done by the pre-processor, which allows for faster code
Just drag-and-drop into an existing Xcode project, doesn't rely on a custom processor
Some minor cons to the implementation:
Objects must have an ownership specifier (limitation with C++ references: Reference to non-const type 'id' with no explicit ownership). Is easily fixed by adding __strong, __weak, or __autoreleasing to the type of the variable
Implementation is hard to read. Because it relies so much on C++ templates and Objective-C working together in harmony, it's difficult to just change 'one thing' and hope for it to work. I have added extensive comments to the implementation, so hopefully that frees some of the burden.
Method swizzling can confuse this majorly. Not the largest of issues, but if you start playing around with method swizzling, don't be surprised if you get unexpected results.
Cannot be used inside a C++ object. Unfortunately, C++ doesn't support runtime attributes, like objective-c does, so we cannot rely upon our variables being cleaned up eventually. For this reason, you cannot use OBJC_IVAR while inside a C++ object. I would be interested in seeing an implementation for that, though.
#line can mess this up drastically, so don't use it.
Version History
1.0: Initial Release
1.1: Updated OBJC_IVAR_NAME to rely only on the preprocessor. As a result, we cannot use __func__.
So, without further ado, here is the code:
OBJC_IVAR.hpp
//
// OBJC_IVAR.h
// TestProj
//
// Created by Richard Ross on 8/17/12.
// Copyright (c) 2012 Ultimate Computer Services, Inc. All rights reserved.
//
#ifndef OBJC_IVAR_HPP
#define OBJC_IVAR_HPP
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#import <objc/runtime.h>
#import "NSValue+CppObject.h"
// Argument counting algorithm. Not too complex
#define __NARG(_1, _2, _3, _4, _5, VAL, ...) VAL
#define NARG(...) __NARG(__VA_ARGS__, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0)
// Different implementations based on number of parameters passed in
#define __OBJC_IVAR(N, ...) _OBJC_IVAR_ ## N (__VA_ARGS__)
#define _OBJC_IVAR(N, ...) __OBJC_IVAR(N, __VA_ARGS__)
// Usage: OBJC_IVAR(Type (optional), Name (required), Default (optional))
#define OBJC_IVAR(...) _OBJC_IVAR(NARG(__VA_ARGS__), __VA_ARGS__)
// create a unique name. we use '__COUNTER__' here to support scoping on the same line, for compressed source code
#define __OBJC_IVAR_STRINGIFY_NAME(file, line, name, counter) #file ":" #line " " #name ":" #counter
#define _OBJC_IVAR_NAME(file, line, name, counter) __OBJC_IVAR_STRINGIFY_NAME(file, line, name, counter)
#define OBJC_IVAR_NAME(name) _OBJC_IVAR_NAME(__FILE__, __LINE__, name, __COUNTER__)
// old style creation. advantage: uses __func__ to determine calling function
// #define OBJC_IVAR_NAME(Name) [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%s:%i %s:%s:%i", __FILE__, __LINE__, __func__, #Name, __COUNTER__]
// implemenations for each of the overloads
#define _OBJC_IVAR_0(...) _Pragma("message \"Cannot call OBJC_IVAR with 0 params!\"")
#define _OBJC_IVAR_1(Name) _OBJC_IVAR_2(__strong id, Name)
// first major implemenation. because we do no assignment here, we don't have to check for is_set
#define _OBJC_IVAR_2(Type, Name) Type& Name = (_OBJC_IVAR::IMPL<Type>(self, OBJC_IVAR_NAME(Name)))
// this is where things get fun. we have 'OBJC_IVAR_CUR_NAME', instead of calling OBJC_IVAR_NAME
// multiple times, because we must ensure that COUNTER does not change during the course of the macro
// this is the 'inner bowels' of C, and it's quite hacky. Returns a reference to an associated object
// which is wrapped in a NSValue. Note that we only evaluate 'default' once throught the course of the
// application's cycle, so you can feel free to put intensive loading code there.
static NSString *_OBJC_IVAR_CUR_NAME;
#define _OBJC_IVAR_3(Type, Name, Default) Type& Name = (_OBJC_IVAR::IS_SET(self, (_OBJC_IVAR_CUR_NAME = OBJC_IVAR_NAME(Name))) ? _OBJC_IVAR::IMPL<Type>(self, _OBJC_IVAR_CUR_NAME) : _OBJC_IVAR::IMPL<Type>(self, _OBJC_IVAR_CUR_NAME, Default))
// namespace to wrap al lof our functions
namespace _OBJC_IVAR
{
// internal dictionary of all associated object names, so that we don't run
// into memory management issues. we use a set here, because we should never
// have duplicate associated object names.
static NSMutableSet *_names = [NSMutableSet set];
// wraps a value and a reference to a value. used over std::reference_wrapper,
// as that doesn't actually copy in the value passed. That is required for what
// we are doing, as we cannot be assigning to constants.
template<typename T>
class Wrapper {
private:
// private value wrapped by this object.
T _value;
// private reference wrapped by this object. should always point to _value.
T& _ref;
public:
// default constructor. assumes 'T' has a valid 0-argument constructor
Wrapper() : _value(), _ref(_value) { }
// argument constructor. makes sure that value is initialized properly
Wrapper(T val) : _value(val), _ref(_value) { }
// returns the reference wrapped by this object
operator T& () {
return _ref;
}
T& get() {
return _ref;
}
};
// interns a name. because objc_getAssociatedObject works only by comparing
// pointers (and +stringWithFormat: isn't guaranteed to return the same pointer),
// we have to make sure that we maintain a list of all valid associated object
// names. these are NOT linked to specific objects, which allows us to reuse some
// memory
inline NSString *name_intern(NSString *name)
{
// intern the value. first check if the object has been interned already,
// and if it is, return that interned value
if (id tmpName = [_names member:name])
{
name = tmpName;
}
// if we haven't interned this value before, then add it to the list and return it.
else
{
[_names addObject:name];
}
return name;
}
// check and see if the requested iVar has been set yet. used for default value setting
BOOL IS_SET(id target, NSString *name)
{
// first intern the name
name = name_intern(name);
// check if the object has this property. objc_getAssociatedObject will ALWAYS
// return NULL if the object doesn't exist. Note the bridged cast. This is because
// objc_getAssociatedObject doesn't care what you throw into the second parameter,
// as long as it is a pointer. That gives us the flexibility at a later date, to,
// for example, just pass a pointer to a single byte, and pull out the value that
// way. However, we pass in a NSString pointer, because it makes it easy for us to
// use and to re-use later.
id val = objc_getAssociatedObject(target, (__bridge const void *) name);
return val != nil;
}
// the actual implementation for setting the iVar. luckily this code isn't too hacky,
// but it is a bit confusing.
template<typename T>
Wrapper<T>& IMPL(id target, NSString *name)
{
// first intern the name
name = name_intern(name);
// define a reference. we use pointers & new here, because C++ memory managment is
// weird at best. Most of the time, you should be using RAII, but when dealing with
// templates & objective-c interpolation, it is almost required that you use pointers
// with new.
Wrapper<T> *reference = nullptr;
// check and see if the object already contains this property, if so, return that value
NSValue *result = objc_getAssociatedObject(target, (__bridge const void *) name);
if (result == nil)
{
// at this point, we need to create a new iVar, with the default constructor for the type.
// for objective-c objects this is 'nil', for integers and floating point values this is 0,
// for C++ structs and classes, this calls the default constructor. If one doesn't exist,
// you WILL get a compile error.
reference = new Wrapper<T>();
// we now set up the object that will hold this wrapper. This is an extension on NSValue
// which allows us to store a generic pointer (in this case a C++ object), and run desired
// code on -dealloc (which will be called at the time the parent object is destroyed), in
// this case, free the memory used by our wrapper.
result = [NSValue valueWithCppObject:reference onDealloc:^(void *) {
delete reference;
}];
// finally, set the associated object to the target, and now we are good to go.
// We use OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN, so that our NSValue is properly freed when done.
objc_setAssociatedObject(target, (__bridge const void *) name, result, OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN);
}
// from result, we cast it's -cppObjectValue to a Wrapper, to pull out the value.
reference = static_cast<Wrapper<T> *>([result cppObjectValue]);
// finally, return the pointer as a reference, not a pointer
return *reference;
}
// this is pretty much the same as the other IMPL, but it has specific code for default values.
// I will ignore everything that is the same about the two functions, and only focus on the
// differences, which are few, but mandatory.
template<typename T>
Wrapper<T>& IMPL(id target, NSString *name, const T& defVal)
{
name = name_intern(name);
Wrapper<T> *reference = nullptr; // asign to be the default constructor for 'T'
NSValue *result = objc_getAssociatedObject(target, (__bridge const void *) name);
if (result == nil)
{
// this is the only difference. Instead of constructing with the default constructor,
// simply pass in our new default value as a copy.
reference = new Wrapper<T>(defVal);
result = [NSValue valueWithCppObject:reference onDealloc:^(void *) {
delete reference;
}];
objc_setAssociatedObject(target, (__bridge const void *) name, result, OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN);
}
reference = static_cast<Wrapper<T> *>([result cppObjectValue]);
return *reference;
}
}
#endif // OBJC_IVAR_HPP
NSValue+CppObject.h
//
// NSValue+CppObject.h
// TestProj
//
// Created by Richard Ross on 8/17/12.
// Copyright (c) 2012 Ultimate Computer Services, Inc. All rights reserved.
//
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
// Extension on NSValue to add C++ object support. Because of the difficulty
// involved in templates, I took the easy way out and simply passed in a block
// of code to be run at dealloc.
#interface NSValue (CppObject)
// create a new NSValue instance that holds ptr, and calls 'deallocBlock' on destruction.
+(id) valueWithCppObject:(void *) ptr onDealloc:(void (^)(void *)) deallocBlock;
-(id) initWithCppObject:(void *) ptr onDealloc:(void (^)(void *)) deallocBlock;
// get the held pointer of this object. I called it -cppObjectValue, so
// there was no confusion with -pointerValue.
-(void *) cppObjectValue;
#end
NSValue+CppObject.m
//
// NSValue+CppObject.m
// TestProj
//
// Created by Richard Ross on 8/17/12.
// Copyright (c) 2012 Ultimate Computer Services, Inc. All rights reserved.
//
#import "NSValue+CppObject.h"
// the concrete NSValue subclass for supporting C++ objects. Pretty straight-forward interface.
#interface ConcreteCppObject : NSValue
{
// the underlying object that is being pointed to
void *_object;
// the block that is called on -dealloc
void (^_deallocBlock)(void *);
}
#end
#implementation ConcreteCppObject
// object initialization
+(id) valueWithCppObject:(void *)ptr onDealloc:(void (^)(void *))deallocBlock
{
return [[self alloc] initWithCppObject:ptr onDealloc:deallocBlock];
}
-(id) initWithCppObject:(void *)ptr onDealloc:(void (^)(void *))deallocBlock
{
if (self = [super init])
{
_object = ptr;
_deallocBlock = deallocBlock;
}
return self;
}
// required methods for subclassing NSValue
-(const char *) objCType
{
return #encode(void *);
}
-(void) getValue:(void *)value
{
*((void **) value) = _object;
}
// comparison
-(BOOL) isEqual:(id)compare
{
if (![compare isKindOfClass:[self class]])
return NO;
return [compare cppObjectValue] == [self cppObjectValue];
}
// cleanup
-(void) dealloc
{
// this should manage cleanup for us
_deallocBlock(_object);
}
// value access
-(void *) cppObjectValue
{
return _object;
}
#end
// NSValue additions for creating the concrete instances
#implementation NSValue (CppObject)
// object initialization
+(id) valueWithCppObject:(void *)ptr onDealloc:(void (^)(void *))deallocBlock
{
return [[ConcreteCppObject alloc] initWithCppObject:ptr onDealloc:deallocBlock];
}
-(id) initWithCppObject:(void *)ptr onDealloc:(void (^)(void *))deallocBlock
{
return [[self class] valueWithCppObject:ptr onDealloc:deallocBlock];
}
// unless the NSValue IS a ConcreteCppObject, then we shouldn't do anything here
-(void *) cppObjectValue
{
[self doesNotRecognizeSelector:_cmd];
return nil;
}
#end
Example Usage:
#import "OBJC_IVAR.hpp"
#interface SomeObject : NSObject
-(void) doSomething;
#end
#implementation SomeObject
-(void) doSomething
{
OBJC_IVAR(__strong id, test, #"Hello World!");
OBJC_IVAR(int, test2, 15);
NSLog(#"%#", test);
NSLog(#"%i", test2 += 7);
// new scope
{
OBJC_IVAR(int, test, 100);
NSLog(#"%i", ++test);
}
[self somethingElse];
}
-(void) somethingElse
{
OBJC_IVAR(int, newVar, 7);
NSLog(#"%i", newVar++);
}
#end
int main()
{
SomeObject *obj = [SomeObject new];
[obj doSomething];
[obj doSomething];
[obj doSomething];
}
I had a class, which was not a singleton, that needed a variable
shared between method calls, like static, but each instance needed
it's own variable.
In that case, the variable is part of the object's state, and it's therefore most appropriate to use an instance variable (or a property). This is exactly what ivars are for, whether they're used in a dozen methods or just one.
I am currently working on an Objective-C++ implementation myself, I
was just wondering if anyone else had any thoughts (or existing tools)
on how to do this.
My advice is to not do it at all. If your goal is to avoid clutter, don't go needlessly trying to add a new storage class to the language.
However, if you're determined to pursue this line, I'd look at using blocks instead of associated objects. Blocks get their own copies of variables that are scoped to the lifetime of the block. For example, you can do this:
- (void)func
{
__block int i = 0;
void (^foo)() = ^{
i++;
NSLog(#"i = %d", i);
};
foo();
foo();
foo();
}
and the output you get is:
i = 1
i = 2
i = 3
Perhaps you can find a clever way to wrap that up in a macro, but it looks to me like a lot of trouble just to avoid declaring an instance variable.
I know there is protocol_copyMethodDescriptionList defined in the Objective-C Runtime, but I don't want to have to go so deep, or work with c-arrays. Are there any methods for the Protocol object that can do this? Where can I find any documentation for the Protocol object? I'm hoping for something like:
[foo getMethodsThisProtocolDefines];
where foo is a Protocol.
The Protocol class has been deprecated since Leopard/ObjC 2.0.* Thus, there are no methods on it, nor any current documentation. The only way to interact with a protocol is via the runtime functions.
The structures contained in the protocol's method list aren't objects, either, so they couldn't go into an NSArray without being wrapped anyways.
It's not particularly arduous to deal with the array that's returned from protocol_copyMethodDescriptionList(); you just have to remember to free() it. If you have a particular selector in mind, you can also check the protocol using protocol_getMethodDescription(), which doesn't require any memory management on your part. For example:
BOOL method_description_isNULL(struct objc_method_description desc)
{
return (desc.types == NULL) && (desc.name == NULL);
}
const char * procure_encoding_string_for_selector_from_protocol(SEL sel, Protocol * protocol)
{
static BOOL isReqVals[4] = {NO, NO, YES, YES};
static BOOL isInstanceVals[4] = {NO, YES, NO, YES};
struct objc_method_description desc = {NULL, NULL};
for( int i = 0; i < 4; i++ ){
desc = protocol_getMethodDescription(protocol,
sel,
isReqVals[i],
isInstanceVals[i]);
if( !method_description_isNULL(desc) ){
break;
}
}
return desc.types;
}
*In fact, it seems (based on a note in the runtime reference) that the name is now just an alias for Class.
You probably want this. Objective-C wrapper for the Objective-C runtime.
Check protocol_copyMethodDescriptionList from Objective-C runtime. This would return back an array of methods on the protocol.