I have a table view with a search, and search scope buttons with two possible scopes. The table is empty until a search is executed. Each scope has it's own mutable array for the table's data source, we'll say scopeA_array and scopeB_array. To simplify some methods, I'm trying to create a generic pointer reference to whichever array is the currently active scope. So I tried this:
#property (nonatomic, assign) NSMutableArray *tableDataArray;
In viewDidLoad, I assign it to the default selected scope.
_tableDataArray = _scopeA_array;
I can log the memory address of each array, they're both the same.
However, if I execute a search, _scopeA_array gets populated. Then in my numberOfRowsInSection method, I take the count of _tableDataArray but it's empty. I log the addresses again, both are different.
How do I create an array property that just references an array, and always points to the same object in memory even if it changes?
EDIT: A simplified way to test this, with the following lines of code, would like a way for tableDataArray to have the contents of testArray, even though the contents of testArray are assigned after:
NSArray *testArray = [NSArray new];
NSArray *tableDataArray = [testArray copy];
testArray = [NSArray arrayWithObjects:#"my", #"test", #"array", nil];
NSLog(#"table data array: %#", tableDataArray);
// logs empty array
I think the best approach is use a method to return conditionally the array for the current scope. So you just always use this method to populate your UITableView
- (NSMutableArray*) tableArray
{
return [self isScopeA] ? _scopeA_array : _scopeB_array;
}
How do I create an array property that just references an array, and always points to the same object in memory even if it changes?
If you want to track changes to a variable then you use a pointer to the variable rather than a pointer to a single array instance. E.g.:
#implementation MyController
{
__strong NSArray* *_currentDataPtr;
NSArray* _dataA;
NSArray* _dataB;
}
- (id)init
{
if (self = [super init])
{
_currentDataPtr = &_dataA; // Ensure _currentDataPtr is never NULL
}
return self;
}
- (void)setSearchScope:(NSInteger)searchScope
{
switch (searchScope)
{
default :
NSAssert(NO, #"");
case 0 :
_currentDataPtr = &_dataA;
break;
case 1 :
_currentDataPtr = &_dataB;
break;
}
}
- (NSInteger)tableView:(UITableView*)tableView numberOfRowsInSection:(NSInteger)section
{
return [*_currentDataPtr count];
}
If you want it to be a property then implement a property getter that dereferences the pointer:
#property (nonatomic, readonly) NSArray* currentData;
- (NSArray*)currentData { return *_currentDataPtr; }
Related
This question already has answers here:
How do I compare objects in Objective-C?
(4 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
I have a list of Objects that I pull from a web service. When I update my UITableView, I retrieve the objects again from the web service, and compare them to each other for equality. I then remove the ones that are not present, and insert the new objects, then update my UITableView. How can I test to see if the new object equals the old object? I've created a test for clarity..
requestA should equal requestC, but fails.
Is this possible to do without looking at each property value as the objects have many values?
I was originally comparing the ID only, but this doesn't work as sometimes other property values change and the ID stays the same.
Request *requestA = [[Request alloc] init];
Request *requestB = [[Request alloc] init];
Request *requestC = [[Request alloc] init];
requestA.requestID = #"1";
requestA.productName = #"Clutch";
requestB.requestID = #"2";
requestB.productName = #"Wiper";
requestC.requestID = #"1";
requestC.productName = #"Clutch";
if (requestA == requestB)
NSLog(#"A == B");
if (requestA == requestC)
NSLog(#"A == C");
if ([requestA isEqual:requestB])
NSLog(#"A isEqual B");
if ([requestA isEqual:requestC])
NSLog(#"A isEqual C");
// Look at the pointers:
NSLog(#"%p", requestA);
NSLog(#"%p", requestB);
NSLog(#"%p", requestC);
isEqual: is a method declared in NSObject Protocol. From official docs of isEqual:
This method defines what it means for instances to be equal. For
example, a container object might define two containers as equal if
their corresponding objects all respond YES to an isEqual: request.
See the NSData, NSDictionary, NSArray, and NSString class
specifications for examples of the use of this method.
If two objects are equal, they must have the same hash value. This
last point is particularly important if you define isEqual: in a
subclass and intend to put instances of that subclass into a
collection. Make sure you also define hash in your subclass.
Thus, as Salavat Khanov pointed out in his answer:
You need to implement -isEqual: and -hash methods for your Request class.
You want to do something like this:
// TestRequest.h
#interface TestRequest : NSObject
#property (nonatomic) NSString *requestID;
#property (nonatomic) NSString *productName;
#end
// TestRequest.m
#import "TestRequest.h"
#implementation TestRequest
- (BOOL)isEqual:(TestRequest *)object {
if (self == object) {
return YES;
}
if (![self.requestID isEqual:object.requestID]) {
return NO;
}
if (![self.productName isEqual:object.productName]) {
return NO;
}
return YES;
}
- (NSUInteger)hash {
// this is a very simple hash function
return [self.requestID hash] ^ [self.productName hash];
}
#end
or you can use a custom method:
- (BOOL)isEqualToRequest:(TestRequest *)otherRequest {
return [self.requestID isEqualToString:otherRequest.requestID] &&
[self.productName isEqualToString:otherRequest.productName];
}
Check this answer: How do I compare objects in Objective-C?
You need to implement -isEqual: and -hash methods for your Request class.
You need to overwrite isEqual: of your Request object to specify the properties to compare.
Write sth. like this:
- (BOOL)isEqual:(id)other {
if (other == self) return YES;
if (!other || ![other isKindOfClass:[self class]]) return NO;
if (![(id)[self name] isEqual:[other name]]) return NO;
// add other checks if needed
return YES;
}
First off. == is a check for "are these two objects actually the SAME OBJECT". I.e. They are just two pointers to the same but of memory.
You need to be using the isEqual method. However, in order to do this properly you need to override the method in the class.
Something like...
- (BOOL)isEqual:(Request *)otherObject
{
return [self.productName isEqual:otherObject.productName]
&& [self.requestID isEqual:otherObject.requestID];
}
I am new to iOS dev,here is my first app-calculator,
But the NSMuteableArray "_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate" always be "nil",I don't know what to do???
Here is the interface
#interface demoViewController ()
#property (strong,nonatomic)NSString *valueString;
#property (strong,nonatomic)NSMutableArray *numberArrayWaitingForCalculate;
#end
here is the implement 1
#implementation demoViewController
#synthesize numberArrayWaitingForCalculate=_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate;
- (NSMutableArray *)numberWaitingForCalculate
{
if(!_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate)
_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate=[[NSMutableArray alloc]init];
return _numberArrayWaitingForCalculate;
}
here is the tapNumber method
- (IBAction)tapNumber:(UIButton *)numberButton {
if(LastButtonWasMode)
{
_valueString=#"";
LastButtonWasMode=NO;
}
NSString *numberAsString = numberButton.currentTitle;
_valueString=[_valueString stringByAppendingString:numberAsString];
result.text=[NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#",_valueString];
}
here is tapPlus method
- (IBAction)tapPlus:(id)sender {
[_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate addObject:[NSNumber numberWithInt:[_valueString intValue]]];
resultOfAllNumberInputBefore +=[_valueString intValue];
[self setMode:1];
}
The following line should be using the property and not the instance variable. i.e. you're not actually calling the getter that allocates the array.
Change this line:
[_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate addObject:[NSNumber numberWithInt:[_valueString intValue]]];
to:
[self.numberArrayWaitingForCalculate addObject:[NSNumber numberWithInt:[_valueString intValue]]];
You created a getter that "lazy loads" the mutable array (meaning that you create it if it doesn't exist already. That's a valid approach.
However, if you do that, you need to ALWAYS use the getter. You're using the iVar directly (_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate). Don't do that. Replace all instances of "_numberArrayWaitingForCalculate" with [self numberArrayWaitingForCalculate] except in the implementation of your getters/setters and probably your dealloc method.
So your tapPlus method should read:
- (IBAction)tapPlus:(id)sender
{
[[self numberArrayWaitingForCalculate] addObject:[NSNumber numberWithInt:[_valueString intValue]]];
resultOfAllNumberInputBefore +=[_valueString intValue];
[self setMode:1];
}
EDIT:
By the way, for something as lightweight as an empty mutable array, I think I would take a different approach. Rather than lazy-loading the array in a getter, I would create an init method for my class that created an empty mutable array and installed it in the iVar.
Objects like view controllers can be initialized more than one way. It might get initialized with initWithNibName:bundle: or with initWithCoder:
What I do in that case is to create a method doInitSetup, and call it from both places.
In my app I'm accessing and changing a mutable array from multiple threads. At the beginning it was crashing when I was trying to access an object with objectAtIndex, because index was out of bounds (object at that index has already been removed from array in another thread). I searched on the internet how to solve this problem, and I decided to try this solution .I made a class with NSMutableArray property, see the following code:
#interface SynchronizedArray()
#property (retain, atomic) NSMutableArray *array;
#end
#implementation SynchronizedArray
- (id)init
{
self = [super init];
if (self)
{
_array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
}
return self;
}
-(id)objectAtIndex:(NSUInteger)index
{
#synchronized(_array)
{
return [_array objectAtIndex:index];
}
}
-(void)removeObject:(id)object
{
#synchronized(_array)
{
[_array removeObject:object];
}
}
-(void)removeObjectAtIndex:(NSUInteger)index
{
#synchronized(_array)
{
[_array removeObjectAtIndex:index];
}
}
-(void)addObject:(id)object
{
#synchronized(_array)
{
[_array addObject:object];
}
}
- (NSUInteger)count
{
#synchronized(_array)
{
return [_array count];
}
}
-(void)removeAllObjects
{
#synchronized(_array)
{
[_array removeAllObjects];
}
}
-(id)copy
{
#synchronized(_array)
{
return [_array copy];
}
}
and I use this class instead of old mutable array, but the app is still crashing at this line: return [_array objectAtIndex:index]; I tried also this approach with NSLock, but without a luck. What I'm doing wrong and how to fix this?
I believe this solution is poor. Consider this:
thread #1 calls count and is told there are 4 objects in the array.
array is unsynchronized.
thread #2 calls removeObjectAtIndex:2 on the array.
array is unsynchronized.
thread #1 calls objectAtIndex:3 and the error occurs.
Instead you need a locking mechanism at a higher level where the lock is around the array at both steps 1 and 5 and thread #2 cannot remove an object in between these steps.
You need to protect (with #synchronized) basically all usage of the array. Currently you only prevent multiple threads from concurrently getting objects out of the array. But you have no protection for your described scenario of concurrent modification and mutation.
Ask yourself why you're modifying the array on multiple threads - should you do it that way or just use a single thread? It may be easier to use a different array implementation or to use a wrapper class that always switches to the main thread to make the requested modification.
I have an array of type NSArray as below:
#property (nonatomic, strong) NSArray *myArray;
In the setter of this array, I want to check if the array count is 0, then return nil else return the array as it is. I am doing it as below:
- (NSArray *)myArray
{
return ([self.myArray count] == 0) ? nil : self.myArray;
}
I am not getting any build error if I return nil for an NSArray, but its giving me run time error of bad access code. What mistake am I making here?
Your getter method is recursively calling itself, because
self.myArray
is translated by the compiler to
[self myArray]
This causes a stack overflow (!) eventually.
Inside a setter or getter method of a property, you have to access
the associated instance variable instead, e.g.
- (NSArray *)myArray
{
return ([_myArray count] == 0) ? nil : _myArray;
}
Do you instantiate the array anywhere else prior to calling this method? It will have to exist before you can access it.
_myArray = [NSArray arrayWithObjects:#"one",#"two",nil];
or one of the many other techniques to create an Array.
I am trying to add an CCSpriteto an array so I can do stuff with in another method. The array is just simply declared in the #interface like this NSMutableArray *currentBombs;
. I then try to add the (CCSprite*)spriteto the array with [currentBombs addObject:sprite];
The problem is that when I log [currentBombs count] or try to use any objects in it or log it or whatever, its empty. As CCSprite is a subclass of NSObject I would think that you can add it to an array? What am I doing wrong here?
Edit: More detailed code:
-(void)aMethod:(CCSprite*)Sprite{
//...
currentBombs = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init];
[currentBombs addObject:sprite];
}
Then I access it a second after in the method
-(void)checkDamageForBomb{
currentBombs = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init];
int cB = [currentBombs count];
for (int q = 0; q <= cB;q++)
{
CCSprite *bomb = [currentBombs objectAtIndex:q];//Crashes
CGPoint bombPos = [self tileCoordForPosition:bomb.position];//Crashes
//........ }
This happens because every time that you call checkDamageForBomb: you reallocate the array. You should instantiate the object just once.
My suggest is to use a property with lazy initialization, and always call self.currentBombs:
#interface MyClass()
#property (nonatomic) NSMutableArray* currentBombs;
#end
#implementation MyClass
#pragma mark - Accessors
- (NSMutableArray*) currentBombs
{
if(!_currentBombs)
_currentBombs=[NSMutableArray array];
return _currentBombs;
}
This way you have to change your code and always call self.currentBombs:
-(void)checkDamageForBomb{
for(CCSprite* bomb in self.currentBombs) // I find fast enumeration more elegant.
{
CGPoint bombPos = [self tileCoordForPosition:bomb.position];
...
}
...
}
So that you don't care of allocating it, the accessor will do it for you the first time that you call it.
You are initializing the variable currentBombs twice. Initialize it once in e.g. ViewDidLoad