This is probably a simple problem for the high skilled Cocoa programmers, but I can't find how to control the graph in a separate window. I read carefully the Cocoa related books, go through many web notes,but I can't find a solution to my problem. The purpose is to use a dedicated window to draw the I=F(Vg) curves extracted by the GUI from a specific hardware. All the GUI and the hardware works fine ( thanks to the help provided by several members of stackoverflow) , but no way to send the parameters to the NSView to display the results.
So far, the GUI class is based on a NSObject, the graphic class is NSView.
Any idea, examples, links will be appreciated. Thank you so much.
Michael
So you have a controller class that receives data and owns a window? Just give it an outlet to the view.
This is the job of the controller in MVC: To pass data from the model (in this case, the hardware connection) to the views.
Related
I'm working on an app that (among other things) uses UIImagePicker to grab an image from the device once the user has selected the SourceType by tapping the appropriate button. Different sections of the app will need to use this functionality, as well as the variable holding the image information once selected. When I first started the project I had all of my code to do this in a single class named ViewController. I'm now working on moving the individual sections of the app into their own classes, but I'd like to be able to have them all use the UIImagePicker functionality from a central location.
Along with the necessary UIImagePickerController methods and protocols, I have a method that presents a view with buttons for each available SourceType. Each of these buttons then send a message to methods to show the appropriate picker (or the camera). Once an image is selected, it is applied to a variable for use by the different sections.
I wanted to get suggestions on the best way to approach this before I went to deep down the wrong rabbit hole.
Thanks!
If a lot of your classes use this functionality, you can create a superclass (itself being a subclass of UIViewController).
This class will expose some method to launch the process you described, and some other to gather the information collected.
If you don't want to use inheritance, or you already to with another class, you can also create a separate class responsible for this process.
This class, which is not necessary a UIViewController, has to be instantiated and then called the same way the superclass described above.
I have a general question for Xcode programming and the usage of the Xcode tools.
I am quite new (4 months) in iOS development and I almost never used the Interface Builder for my purposes. I always created instances programatically. My question is basically if you think i should get used to work with IB or should/can i proceed like i do now?
If you are fine with defining your UI programmatically, then I do not see any issues with that.
Interface Builder allows you to "graphically" define your interface, and this can be an invaluable tool for playing with your UI prototypes, but apart from that there is nothing that you can do in IB that you cannot do programmatically.
In my case, I see that it depends on the kind of UI that I design. When I need a pretty basic UI, the IB is unbeatable for me. On the other hand, when my UI tries to be a bit custom, then I prefer doing everything programmatically.
An interesting point is that you could use IB to design your UI, deciding on sizes and positions of your elements, and the create it programmatically.
Yes you should use IB, basically xcode having IB for ease of development, no need to setting controlls by using coordinates and each time see their visibility by running the app.
just drag and drop and at the time of making the views, you can see hows your screen going to look.
Also using IB is not a typical task so,start development using IB.
I'm relatively new to Objective-C and Cocoa... I've been trying to understand how to correctly implement the MVC pattern in Cocoa/Cocoa Touch for a long time now... I understand the idea behind it; it makes complete sense conceptually: a model holds the data, a view is what that the user sees and can interact with, and the controller acts as the bridge between the two. View can't talk to the model, model can't talk to the view. Got it.
What doesn't make sense to me is how to use MVC efficiently… if the user can only interact with the view, and does something to interact with it (i.e. for an iPhone app, the user clicks/drags within a subclass of UIView, triggering the "touchesBegan" and "touchesMoved" methods, etc.), how does the view communicate these events to the controller?
I've looked at countless examples and forums online, but have yet to find a simplified all-purpose way of achieving this… I know how to communicate with a controller through buttons, sliders, and other things that you can connect to an outlet, but for things that don't have a target-action mechanism, what's the best way to do it?
Thanks in advance for any suggestions regarding what to do, or where to look.
The standard way in Cocoa to do this is the delegate pattern (cf. UITableViewDelegate). Your view class would declare a delegate protocol and the controller sets itself as the view's delegate. The view then calls one of the delegate methods you defined whenever it wants to communicate something to the controller.
An alternative would be to implement the target-action mechanism for your view yourself. You get this more or less for free if you subclass from UIControl (just call sendActionsForControlEvents:) but it is quite easy to implement a system that works the same way for any custom class.
(Edit: I suppose a third way is to have the controller observe properties of the view (with KVO). This wouldn't work well to communicate touch events but it is a feasible way if you want to notify the controller about a state change or something like that.)
Is there disadvantages to using WebKit WebViews compared to using NSViews?
I'm using a webview to create a UI for an application. The application itself does not have much interactivity. I have seen it mentioned, on this website & others, that using a WebView can be convient means of prototyping.
However, with our team this seems like an ideal way to produce the production ready UIs, especially with WebKit. Are we missing something?
Thanks,
Ross
Okay, so you seem to be asking if using an HTML interface (presented via a WebView) for your application has any disadvantages.
The answer to this is "no", at least "not necessarily". This is analogous to building an iPhone specific web application, and there are some excellent examples of those. The caveat would be that a lot of those sites end up recreating the look and feel of a native iPhone app, for consistency and to make the users feel "at home".
Given that you're developing a native app anyway, it seems a shame to throw away, or recreate, the responsiveness and appearance of the native chrome. Of course, for certain types of applications (games are an obvious example) a user has no expectations about the application's UI, so you're free to knock yourself out.
The other factor to consider is the amount of interactivity (although I notice that you say there isn't much in your case). The native controls will make coding a lot simpler than having to capture all user input through the "filter" of a WebView, even though using one might make the initial layout of the screens easier.
I hope that's the sort of answer you were looking for (although it's mostly non technical).
As you might have known if you spend some time in the documentation, you'd have seem that WebView is a subclass of NSView.
The documentation says about WebView:
WebView is the core view class in the WebKit framework that manages interactions between the WebFrame and WebFrameView classes. To embed web content in your application, you just create a WebView object, attach it to a window, and send a loadRequest: message to its main frame.
And about NSView:
NSView is a class that defines the basic drawing, event-handling, and printing architecture of an application. You typically don’t interact with the NSView API directly; rather, your custom view classes inherit from NSView and override many of its methods, which are invoked automatically by the Application Kit. If you’re not creating a custom view class, there are few methods you need to use.
So here's the answer to your question:
Is there disadvantages to using WebKit WebViews compared to using NSViews?
Yes. You can't display any web content with NSView. That's what you need WebView for.
I suggest reading some more documentation though.
I'm trying to re-implement an old Reversi board game I wrote with a bit more of a snazzy UI. I've looked at Jens Alfke's GeekGameBoard code for inspiration, and CALayers looks like the way to go for implementing the UI.
However, there is no clean separation of model and view in the GeekGameBoard code; the model is the view, which makes it hard to, for example, make a copy of the game state in order to perform game-tree search for the AI player. However, I don't seem to be able to come up with an alternative way to structure that allows a separation of model and view that doesn't involve a constant battle to keep two parallel grids (on for the model, one for the view) in synch. This, of course, has its own problems.
How do I best best implement the relationship between an AI search-friendly model structure and a display-friendly view? Any suggestions / experiences would be appreciated. I'm dreading / half expecting an answer along the lines of "there is no good answer: deal with it as best you can" but I'm prepared to be surprised!
Thanks for the answer Peter. I'm not entirely sure I understand it fully, however. I can see how this works if you just have an initial set of pieces that are moved around, and even removed, but what happens when a person puts a new piece down? Would it work like this:
User clicks in the view.
View click is translated to a board location and controller is notified.
Controller creates a new Board with the successor state (if appropriate, i.e. it was a legal move).
The view picks up the new board via its bindings, tears down the existing view/layer hierarchy and replaces it with the current state.
Does that sound right?
PS: Sorry for failing to specify whether it was for the iPhone or Mac. I'm most interested in something that works for the iPhone, but if I can get it to work nicely on the Mac first I'm sure I can adapt the solution to work on the iPhone myself. (Or post a new question!)
In theory, it should be the same as for an NSView-based UI: Add a model property (or properties), expose it (or them) as bindings, then bind the view (layer) to the model through a controller.
For example, you might have a Board class with Pieces on it (each Piece having a reference to the Player who owns it), with all of those being model classes. Your controller would own a Board, and your view/layer would be able to display a Board, possibly with a subview/sublayer for each Piece.
You'd bind your board view/layer to the controller's board property, and in your view/layer's setter for that property, create a subview/sublayer for each piece, and bind it to any properties of the Piece that it will need. (Don't forget to unbind and remove all the subviews/sublayers when replacing the main view/layer's Board.)
When you want to move or modify a Piece, you'd do so using its own properties; these will translate to property accesses on the view/layer. Ostensibly, you'll have your layer's properties set up to animate changes (so that, for example, changing a Piece's position will cause the layer for it to move accordingly).
The same goes for the Board. You might let the user change one or both tile colors; you'll bind your color well(s) through your game controller to its Board object, and with the view/layer bound to the same property of the same Board, it'll pick up the change automatically.
Disclaimers: I've never used Core Animation for anything, and if you're asking about Cocoa Touch instead of Cocoa, the above solution won't work, since it depends on Cocoa Bindings.
I have an iPhone application where almost all of the interface is constructed using Core Animation CALayers, and I use a very similar pattern to what Peter describes. He's correct in that you want to treat your CALayers as if they were NSViews / UIViews and manage their logic through controllers and data via model objects.
In my case, I create a hierarchy of controller objects which also function as model objects (I may refactor to split out the model components). Each of the controller objects manages a CALayer, so there ends up being a parallel CALayer display hierarchy to the model-controller one. For my application, I need to perform calculations for equations constructed using this hierarchy, so I use the controllers to provide calculated values from the bottom of the tree up. The controllers also handle user editing events, such as the insertion of new suboperations or deletion of operation trees.
I've created a layer-hosting view class that allows the CALayer tree to respond to touch or mouse events (the source of which is now available within the Core Plot project). For your boardgame example, the CALayer pieces could take in the touch events, and have their controllers manage the back-end logic (determine a legal move, etc.). You should just be able to move pieces around and maintain the same controllers without tearing everything down on every move.