I am displaying a number of cells, whose content is reasonably memory intensive. I have a custom controller that sets up a view to display the content, and updates the UI periodically. However, often UICollectionView asks for a particular cell several times. I want to know how to design (well) a system to re-use the controller + view if I have already created it for a given piece of data. I thought about storing a controller reference in the data object, but don't know if storing UI elements in what is meant to be data is a good idea. Also, if I did this, I would need to monitor retainCount on cell unload, and when it gets to '1', remove it from the data object, which seems a bit hacky. Similarly, a NSDictionary of data->controller pairs in the UICollectionView could also work, and would again require monitoring retainCount, or re-implementing a retain counting mechanism for my particular case. It's doable, but seems clunky.
I'm very new to ios, so it may be I'm approaching this all wrong. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!
First of all, think if displaying a controller view inside a cell is a good idea. I'm not sure, but since i'm not familiar with your project, it's something only you can tell.
Secondly, You can create your own pool of controllers. When you need a controller to put inside the cell (in cellforIndexPath method), take one from the pool. If the pool is empty, create a new one. The cell shouldn't come with a controller of it's own, put it only in cellForItemMethod.
Related
I'm creating a project which uses a UICollectionView. As the user selects a cell this slides them to another UICollectionView of similar nature. Ive been noticing that no matter how I go about this I wind up with mountains of memory usage.
I've been experimenting with placing UICollectionView's in full page UICollectionViewCell's so as to take advantage of the reusability of UICollectionViews. The downside of this approach has been memory retention as the CollectionViews are never fully deallocated. Ive also heard that it is not the best practice to put a UICollectionView in a UICollectionView.
I've experimented with UIPageViewController's containing UIViewController's with the UICollectionView inside. This is more efficient as the UIViewController's can be deallocated as the user swipes back however as long as the user continues to select cells and create new view controllers the memory grows unbounded looking like a mountain.
As a bit of a hybrid I attempted as well to put ViewControllers containing UICollectionView's on UICollectionViewCell's. This method seemed to work best but I had to deallocate the view controllers manually as the user swiped.
Are there any strategies or libraries anyone could recommend that would fit this problem. How can I keep the memory down. I understand I'll need some kind of reusable views.
Ive been looking into this Library so far thank you in advance for all of your advise
Parchment Library
I think I understand what you're saying. You have a UICollectionView that can drill down to another UICollectionView, leaving the first one and its backing data retained until you come back and pop it off. Drilling down further and further allocates more and more memory until you back out.
I'd keep things as simple as possible. Solutions like putting a UICollectionView inside UICollectionViewCells can cause your code to get unnecessarily complicated, resulting in new issues and code that's programmer-hostile. If the user experience that works best is a collection view UI that you can drill down into infinitely, then go with that paradigm.
Your issue is not with UICollectionViews, it's in managing your backing data's memory use. That could be done a few ways. It would help to know what kind of data you have that's so large, and what "large" means, but here are a few approaches that come to mind.
One idea would be to unload any large data when you go to the next screen. For example, if your datasource uses an array with a bunch of large images, clear them out when the next view is pushed. Reload the data when your view appears again, or do it lazily when the view's cells need it, whichever works best for you. This would be the easiest approach and probably take care of your memory concerns.
A second approach would be to use one UICollectionView and use custom animations so it looks like a new collection view is pushing/popping from an old one, when in fact you're just changing the data for the collection view and reloading. You could even provide animations that are more interesting than pushing/popping.
On top of either of these approaches, you could implement the UICollectionView prefetch API calls to load data just before you need it. That will reduce your memory footprint even further.
All of these approaches assume that you can load the data to display from storage-- that it's not just in memory from recent webservice requests. Your users are guaranteed a miserable experience if your app has to keep requesting the same large data from the web over and over. So, if you don't have the data stored locally already, set up a cache.
Regardless of the approach, this is something you should be able to handle without adopting a library. UICollectionViews are designed to be memory friendly. Your issue is really in determining the best way to manage your backing data's memory use.
I'm developing an Chat application where I have a UICollectionView to control the messages and I came to a situation I would like to confirm with you.
For exemple, let's say I have 60 items in this UICollectionView, but based on the size of the items and the scrolling options I set, only the last 10 items are visible on the screen, from 50 to 59.
Based on that, it seems I'm not able to get cellForItem at IndexPath 30, for example. Is that correct?
I would like to confirm that with you before creating a solution to go over the items that are already "on screen" and I need to check. Any ideas and solutions you have already implemented is appreciated.
Also, based on the information above if, for example, I need to move on item from index path 30 to 31, will I have problems if they are not "instantiated" in the screen?
Thanks in advance!
You seem to be mixing your model, controller, and view classes, which is a bad thing™ for exactly the reason you encounter here.
I take it you're trying to access data from the index 30 (basically) and say to yourself "Hey, I already added that in the 30th cell, so I will just use the collection view's method to get that cell and take it from there". That means, you basically ask a view for data.
That won't work, because, as others pointed out (but more indirectly), there are not 60 cells at all at any given moment. There's basically as many cells as fit on the screen, (plus perhaps one or a few "buffer" cells so rendering during scrolling works, I can't remember that atm). This is why cellForItem(at:) is nil for an IndexPath that refers to a cell not actually visible at the moment. Basically it works in a similar way to a table view. The collection view simply does not keep around stuff it doesn't need to render for memory reasons.
If you need anything from a cell (which is after all also a view) at this path, why don't you get it from whatever data object represents the contents of this cell? Usually that's the UICollectionViewDataSource.
That's how the paradigm is supposed to work: The UICollectionViewDataSource is responsible for keeping around any data your app may need at a given time (this may or may not reloading it or parts of it, your choice). The UICollectionView uses its collectionView(_:cellForItemAt:) method when a certain IndexPath becomes visible, but it throws that away again (or rather queues it again so your data source may dequeue it in collectionView(_:cellForItemAt:) and reuse it for another data set that becomes visible).
And btw, please don't use use the UICollectionViewDataSource's collectionView(_:cellForItemAt:) method to get the cell and then the data from there. This method is supposed to be called by the collection view and depending on how you reuse cells or create them, this might mess up the entire process. Or at the very least create view-related overhead. Instead, get the data in the same way your UICollectionViewDataSource would get in inside of the method. Wrap that in an additional method you rely on or the like. Or, even better, rely on the model object that the controller uses as well.
Edit in response to your comment:
No, I did not mean it's bad to use a UIViewController as a UICollectionViewDataSource for a UICollectionView. What I meant was that it's bad to use the UICollectionView to get data, because that's what the data source is for. In your question you were wondering why cellForItem(at:) gives nil. That method is defined on UICollectionView. You didn't mention your intention was to move items around (I'll explain in a second), so I assumed you were trying to get whatever data was in the cell (I know, "assume makes an ass out of u and me...", sorry :) ). This is not the way to go, as the UICollectionView is not meant to hold the data for you. Rather, that's your job, and you can use a UICollectionViewDataSource for that. This latter class (or rather protocol a class can adopt) is basically meant to offer an interface for UICollectionView to get the data. It needs that, because, as said, it doesn't keep all data around. It requests stuff it needs from the data source. The data source, on the other hand, can manage that data itself, or maybe it relies on some deeper class architecture (i.e. other objects taking care of the underlying model) to get this. That part depends on your design. For smaller scenarios having the data source simply have the data in an array or dictionary is enough. Furthermore, a lot of designs actually use a UIViewControllerto adoptUICollectionViewDataSource`. That may be sufficient, but be careful not to blow up your view controller to a monstrosity that does everything. That's just a general tip, you have to decide on your own what is "too much".
Now to your actual intention: To move around cells you don't need to get them. You simply tell the UICollectionView to move whatever is at a given index path to some other index path. The according method is moveItem(at:to:). This works even if cellForItem(at:) would return nil for one of the two index paths. The collection view will ensure the cells are there before they become visible. it does so relying on the data source again, more specifically its collectionView(_:cellForItemAt:) method. Obviously that means you have to have your data source prepared for the move, i.e. it needs to return the correct cell for the given index. So alter your data source's internal storage (I assume an array?) before you move the items in the collection view.
Please see the documentation for more info on that. Also note that this is basically how to move items around programmatically. If you want the user to interactively move them around (in a chat that seems weird to me, though), it gets a little more complicated, but the documentation also helps with that.
Based on your question. If the currently visible cells on screen are from 50 to 59, the cellForItem at IndexPath 30 will not be available. It would be nil. Reason being the 30the cell would have already been reused to display one of the cells from 50 to 59.
There would not be problem to move cell from 30 to 31. Just update your array/data source and reload the collection view.
You can access the cell only if its visible for non visible cell you need to scroll programmatically using indexpath:-
collectionView.scrollToItem(at: yourIndexPath, at: UICollectionViewScrollPosition.top, animated: true)
Every single time I need to create a simply tableview that is populated by a simple data set retrieved from my web server which has its code executed like this: SELECT * FROM table I find myself spending two blady whole hours trying to get the new view controller up and running as I try to update some variable names, copy and paste the required code from my previous view controllers. etc its ridiculous.
This is the end result for all my view controller pages where each will contain different data sets depending on the web service url being called:
Here is a link:
Link to downloading staple code .h .m and .xib files
This view controller contains a few simple elements seen throughout all data viewing pages:
UITableView
Titled header views
table indices.
refresh table control feature
data connection retrieval code
data connection succeeded
data connection failed
setting up all my bloody delegate and data source methods.
I find myself having to copy and paste all the staple code, functions, variables, properties, and IBOutlets; and to be frank, its getting ridiculously paintaking to have to repeat the same procedure over and over again but changing variable names between the different view controllers.
This is why I believe people create simple component like structures that make it easy for users to get tables setup and up and running.
How can I reduce this big chunk of code:
to something that will allow me at most do this:
Create a new view controller
Setup xib file
create appropriate IBOutlets, and hook them up to the xib.
Here's where it needs to change
I need to now simply able to write something like this the next time I am goin to create another data viewing View Controller:
[self setupTableForDataSetType:]; //This will make sure the tableView knows which data set its dealing with and so therefor know which DataModel classes to use
[self retrieveDataWithWebServerURL:]; //of course so that the connection code can make the right server connection with the URL given for the data set required.
Thats it. So that it is super easy for me to create the tableView pages desired and show the results quickly! Atm I have the same code everywhere in different view controllers.
Whats the best way to go about doing this?
Create a viewcontroller with all your customizable values as properties and reuse changing its values.
Well, subclassing is probably the best (maybe only) way. I've done something like this for tables with an index, since they're a bit of a pain to set up. I created a IndexedTableViewController that handles almost all the load. I make my app table view controller a subclass of that controller, and then I only need to feed a simple array of custom objects to the method, convertArray:usingSectionKey:secondarySortKey:(implemented in the IndexedTableViewController) which creates the sections and the index. The only other method I have to implement in my app table view controller is cellForRowAtIndexPath:(though I would have to implement more, especially didSelectRowAtIndexPath:, if I were doing more things with this table).
Your needs sound a bit more ambitious than this, so it would take quite a bit of work to make a superclass that would be general enough to work with most of your apps. A method like setupTableForDataSetType: could be quite complicated if it needs to handle many different data types.
All,
I hope most of you know that with ios7 there is not need to do a null check for tableview reuse
if (cell == nil) {
But unfortunately, because of that the cells are always reinitialized, as we put the code in the same method for initializing values. The problem is only with text fields inside the tableview though.
Let me explain the scenario. I have a table view with multiple rows, and some rows contain multiple text boxes. I populate the textboxes with data from server when the page is loaded. Since the cells are always re-initialized as i explained above, whatever I enter in the field goes away and the server data is re populated once i scroll down and come back to the initial stage. This is because the populating the data code is also in the same place. After fetching a reusable cell it populates the data.
Previously till ios6, we used if(cell==nil) and hence we loaded server data inside the cell and when reusing the cell, this piece of code will never be called.
I have other dirty solutions, but would like to know if someone else has a graceful way of dealing this. Please help.
You just don't store any data in the table view cell but in the model that fills the table cell. This is always the way it should be done.
Looking from the MVC standpoint than the UITableViewCell is a view. Since it is reused by iOS you should use a model to the view.
Yes, this is the expected behavior of UITableView. For performance reasons, cells are reused. Thus, it is your responsibility to populate the views in a Table View Cell every time tableView:cellForRowAtIndexPath: is called.
The thing I don't understand from your question - are you making a network call every single time a cell comes into view? If so, cache the results somewhere. Or, if it's a small amount of data, consider just doing it all in one shot at the beginning (still need to be asynchronous though).
One thing I see a lot of developers do is move a lot of code into UITableViewCell subclasses, which sounds like a good idea because it's modular, but makes solutions for problems like this more difficult. Have the Table View Data Source manage the network calls.
If you need some inspiration, look at Apple's LazyTableImages sample.
I found this in SO; it doesn't exactly answer my question, which is: is there a way to clone a UITableView from one controller to another while using Storyboards and maintain synchronization?
You can clone them in the sense that their initial property values remain the same, like position, layout etc. For this, just copy the UITableView from storyboard, go to destination view controller and paste it there.
If you share same UITableView object between two view controllers, it is still possible, but you must estimate how much work you would have to do yourself. When a view controller solely handles a table view, much of the work is done under the hood and table is handed over to you. In case of your UITableView shared between two view controllers, you would have to play with it quite carefully. You need to take care of entire life cycle of the view - see the usual methods like viewDidLoad, viewDidAppear and so on. How would you take care of them when your view exists in two scenes? Maybe you would be inventing a unique design pattern - if at all you find the most optimistic and programmatically correct way to accomplish it.
With storyboards, you cannot achieve cloning up to the level wherein data changes will reflect seamlessly between the two. Storyboard is, as the name suggest, just a board, where you can draw things to know how would they look initially, before your code takes over.
In order to achieve what you want, you have to create a shared model that updates two table views through proper delegate methods. Most likely such a model (NSArray, or any such collections as per your requirement) can reside inside a shared class (app delegate isn't a wrong choice), from where both your view controllers can refer to it. That is neat practice, it not only is right from programming perspective but also extensible and helpful to anyone who deals with the code any time.
For details about how to update UI from your model, there is nothing better than starting from scratch, going through the books I mean.
I am not aware of such possibilities.
I would pass the tableview source object amongst different controllers and let the view controller handle their own table view.
I think the best approach would be to use a framework such as the freely available Sensible TableView, then use the same model for both table views. This should be really straight forward.