Can a view controller be a delegate of itself - ios

I have a UINavigationController that has a bunch of PhotoViewAViewControllers in its stack.
This happens because each PhotoViewAViewController has a button to add more photos and it chains them together. There is also a count on each page of the total.
How do I update the count? I have read to do this use delegation. But can a class be a delegate of itself?
Also curious, can class A be a delegate of class B and vice versa?

Yes, an instance of a class can be a delegate for itself, or you could have a circular delegate relationship. Neither of these situations are common though.
In your case you should post a notification when the count changes so that all interested controllers can observe the event and update.
Note that an alternative is to check and update the count in viewWillAppear:

Related

Observing UIViewController viewWillAppear / Disappear from an external object?

I've extracted my NSFetchedResultsController's into a separate object. I'd like to monitor when the view controller appears and disappears so that I can pause and resume the FRC delegate methods to update the tableview with new content. Is this possible without any responsibility from the view controller itself? I.e. I know I could use delegates or notifications, but I am looking for a solution where I don't have to sprinkle code all over the view controllers.
It seems there isn't an official way to do this, so here's what I did.
- (void)viewWillAppear:(BOOL)animated
{
[super viewWillAppear:animated];
[self.fetchedController willAppear];
}
And then handled the necessary logic in there... pretty basic.
Maybe another time I'll post about my fetchedController. It's pretty neat: it holds a UISearchController (and delegates), 2 data sources (one for the regular view, and one for the search). There's a protocol that the view controller implements (tableView, entity name, context, sort descriptors, configureCell, etc) so I never have to create search controllers, NSFetchedResultsController's, or any of the delegates directly. It's much cleaner than having a god UIViewController superclass.

Not able to get the video if the stream is created first in OPENTOK

I am basically trying to implement a video conference functionality using opentok.
I have two view controllers.
Class A that has a grey image(to tell user is offline).
It calls setsession from class B to establish the session.
uses ClassADelegate and implements setUserOnlineImage that sets the class A grey image to green.
Class B holds a method useronline.
Has a class method sharedinstance that gives out the singleton instance of the class
viewdidload ->sets a variable type = 2;
setsession ->sets a variable type = 1;
It also has a protocol "ClassADelegate"
Protocol ClassADelegate has method setUserOnlineImage.
Has a callback method session:streamCreated: that is called when a subscriber is created and setupPublisher that publishes the video
The flow is like this.
first Class A calls the setsession from Class B to establish session.
Then when a connect button is clicked the viewdidload is called and then the setupPublisher is called, view is modified loaded and all that.
Now when a subscriber tries to connect session:streamCreated: is called. here when i try to print type value it comes as one, likewise many other variables also become nil which inturn results in just giving the audio and the video isnt seen.
where as if first session:streamCreated: is called (first video is received and then connect is clicked) the flow works fine and the print statement in session:streamCreated: correctly prints type value as 2.
Someone help me figure out whats happening.
I want to know why the type value is getting changed & various other variables become nil. This is preventing the video from showing. Am i missing something? Is any other instance is been taken(but I am using a singleton instance)?
The flow you describe doesn't follow any of the known patterns of how UIViewControllers should behave. Specifically, you shouldn't need to use a singleton instance of a view controller. I think you need to reconsider the architecture, specifically the relationship between these two view controllers.
By the way, the viewDidLoad method is called on the view controller as soon as its view property becomes available, which can be before its on the screen. If the view controller is loading its view from a storyboard or nib, viewDidLoad is called as soon as that view is ready. Otherwise if you are implementing loadView, viewDidLoad is called after that method is finished.
Can you describe what Class A and Class B are trying to accomplish? It sounds like Class A is a view controller for some type of status view that shows a user's online/offline status. Class B sounds like its the OTSessionDelegate as well as the view controller for where the publisher/subscriber views will be placed. Why are these not the same View Controller? (generally view controllers are meant to control a "screenful" of content, unless you are using View Controller Containment). If these two view controllers are not on the screen at the same time, can you use a segue to pass data between them when the transition occurs?
UPDATE:
The additional information is useful for me to give you a recommendation. The thing I'm still uncertain about is if you actually do have these 2 view controllers' views on screen at the same time. This solution should work in both cases.
Outside of a segue, one view controller should not really be calling another view controller's methods directly (so calling setsession as you described is a bad idea). You shouldn't even set one as the delegate of another. At most they should share a Model object to communicate. The OTSession can be seen as a Model object. The challenging limitation is that when using the delegation pattern, only one object (you chose Class B) can be informed of updates. Rather than using the delegation pattern, I think you should use NSNotifications. In order to accomplish this, you should "wrap" the OTSession model in your own model object, setting your own model object as the delegate. Then you can notify both controllers of interesting changes as they happen. I've created a diagram to demonstrate:
In this diagram, all the downward solid arrows are owning references. VideoConference would be your own class and it would implement the OTSessionDelegateProtocol. On initialization, the VideoConference instance would create and own an OTSession instance. When something happens that Class A or Class B need to know about (such as the remote user coming online), VideoConference can send an NSNotification, which both controllers can be observers. Here is a useful article about NSNotifications.

To use a UIView or UIViewController for timer object?

I've got a UI with several elements, some of which I'd like to encapsulate into their own objects. For example, one object would be a timer (basically just a UILabel sitting in a UIView) with the externally-available members:
startTime (property)
start and pause (methods)
(And also a im_done NSNotification when the timer reaches 0.) This object and several others would be used together in a single UIViewController.
Would a UIView or UIViewController be more appropriate to subclass for the timer object (and all the others)? Reading this answer leads me to believe UIView, but for my specific case (especially for the more complicated objects), I'm not sure. Thanks for reading.
EDIT: Just to clarify, I would want all code that implements timer functionality separate from my main view controller. One big reason is so that the timer object would be portable.
You should have a subclass of UIView, but it should just have the view components to display whatever time information you need. You should also have a MyTimer class which encapsulates the timing functionality and provides callbacks on changes (such as the time remaining and perhaps the completion as a separate when the time remaining reaches zero). Ideally the callbacks pass the MyTimer and, as a convenience, the remaining time value so you don't need to use the accessor method in the simple use case).
Now, you already have a view controller which is managing your broader view, and it can create add your UIView subclass to the main view and create, own and manage the associated MyTimer instances which drive those views.
This I think comes down to preference. You'll include a uiview and uiviewcontroller in a parent view controller differently and this difference can make a uiviewcontroller more difficult if you don't understand containers. I would say best practice would be in a uiviewcontroller but it really is up to you.

how to pass data to the parent class in ios?

I am a beginner in objective-C. So please forgive if my question is silly.
In my root view controller A, I added a subview B.
In b there will be another subview C. C contains another subview D.
How can I call a method in A from D.
I know that we can use delegates for passing data to the parent controller.
But my question is that do i need to create delegate which calls C from D and another one for call B from C and so on?
Or is there any method which directly calls a method in A from D?
But my question is that do i need to create delegate which calls C from D and another one for call B from C and so on?
The view controller's job is to manage it's view and all of that view's subviews. If you've got a view that needs to send the view controller a message, like a control that needs to send a message somewhere when the user changes its value, then the view controller should be aware that it's there. In such a case, the view controller can take care of setting itself (or some other appropriate object) as said subview's delegate or target when the view hierarchy is loaded, like this:
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
self.needControl.delegate = self;
}
That way, the needy control doesn't need to know anything about the object that is its delegate. It's not assuming that the object is the view controller, or its parent view, or anything else. All it cares about is that it has a delegate, and that its delegate implements the necessary methods. And that, in turn, helps you keep your code more flexible and maintainable and maybe even reusable.
Do i need to create delegate which calls C from D and another one for call B from C and so on? No
You can use a single delegate to call a method in A from D. From your comments i came to know B,C,D are UIView's controlled your root view controller. So the job is easy you need to set a delegate as its root view controller upon creating each sub views.
1. View B is creating from the root view controller itself so viewB.delegate = self
2. View C is creating from the view B so viewC.delegate = self.delegate
3. Repeat same for view D also
Now all your views are controlled by your delegate rootViewController.
Finally This answer will help you to complete your task
You should structure your code so that class D does not know class A exists at all.
There are a few specific techniques that are common in iOS/Mac programming:
class D has a delegate property, and calls methods on it. Use this when only one object can receive the delegate method, particularly useful for things like a button asking if it should be enabled or disabled right now. Use interface builder to set the delegate of the view to your instance of class A.
class D should have a "target" property (type id) and an "action" property (type SEL), and it sends the action message/selector to the target object. useful for when a view has a specific single action that it triggers, such as when a button is pressed, or the user presses Enter in an text field. Use interface builder to set the target and action of the view to your instance of class A.
class D sends messages and metadata to [NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter], and class A tells the notification center that it wants to observe those notifications. Useful when potentially many objects need to be notified when something happened, such as when a text field receives or looses keyboard focus.
class D has a property or properties sends Key Value Observing notifications whenever it the value of the property changes. Class A would tell the Key Value Observing system that it wants to know whenever a specific property on class D changes. This is useful when you care specifically about some data, such as when the value of a text field changes.
All of these techniques are described in more detail here on stack overflow or in Apple's official documentation.
Class B and C also should not know that class A exists. Class A should be the one that knows how to find the other objects, unless you can use interface builder (the first two options allow that).
Add your A_viewCon.h file into your D_viewCon.h file
create object of A_viewCon and set #property and #synthesize as properly.
call method of A_viewCon in D_viewConwrite following code.
[self.objectOFA_viewCon performSelector:#selector(MethodNameOFA_viewCon) withObject:nil afterDelay:0];
U can register Class A to observe a NSNotification like ->
- (void)addObserver:(id)observer selector:(SEL)aSelector name:(NSString *)aName object:(id)anObject;
and post NSNotifications from Object of class D like ->
- (void)postNotificationName:(NSString *)aName object:(id)anObject userInfo:(NSDictionary *)aUserInfo;
This way u do not need to keep a reference/delegate and still u can communicate between alive objects.

why retain of delegate is wrong what are all alternatives...?

I have one problem let assume A and B are 2 view controller from A user push to B view controller,In B user starts some download by creating object C(which is NSObject class) and sets B as delegate to C(assign),now user want go back to A then dealloc of B calls object releases, C delegate fails to give call back(crashes).I want to get call and allow user to move to other view controller thats way i am retain the delegate in C class but retain of delegate is wrong ...
what are all solutions ...
Thanks in Advance.
I see two options:
You do not need the downloaded data. Solution: set the delegate to nil.
You need the data. Solution: You either set a new delegate that exists, or the delegate should make sure it will be around (f.e. by being a singleton)
That happens because of an issue in your architecture: you're assigning the global task of background downloading to a view controller that may or may not be in memory.
If you want to be able to continue the download regardless of the presence of B, then:
Create a class "downloader" that takes care of downloading files (I believe you call it C in your example).
Such class should have a delegate of type "weak" so that if the original delegate goes away, the app won't crash (NOTE: this is only available if you use ARC). If you need to globally monitor the progress of your download, switch to NSNotification instead of delegate so that multiple object can monitor at the same time.
Initialize an instance of C somewhere else: either in A or before that.
Inject the instance of C into B so that B by creating a custom init method or a #property.

Resources