I am new to iOS programming, and I could not find an answer out there already.
In Xcode 5, I am iterating over an array, and attempting to update a label with the values as they change.
here is the .h file...
#import <UIKit/UIKit.h>
#interface ViewController : UIViewController
#property (strong, nonatomic) NSArray *currentNumber;
#property (strong, nonatomic) IBOutlet UILabel *showLabel;
- (IBAction)start;
#end
here is the main part of the .m file...
#import "ViewController.h"
#interface ViewController ()
#end
#implementation ViewController
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
[super viewDidLoad];
self.currentNumber = [NSArray arrayWithObjects:#"1", #"2", #"3", #"4", nil];
}
This is where it gets tricky...
The following works perfectly...
- (IBAction)start {
self.showLabel.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"new text"];
}
#end
As does this...
- (IBAction)start {
for (NSString *p in self.currentNumber) {
NSLog(#"%#", p);
sleep(3);
}
}
#end
But when I replace the NSLog with setting the .text attribute, it "fails". The timing still happens, and the label updates with the last item in the array after...
- (IBAction)start {
for (NSString *p in self.currentNumber) {
self.showLabel.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#", p];
sleep(3);
}
}
#end
And the last bit of weirdness, if I use the NSLog, and try to change the .text attribute before the "for" loop is called, the text change is ignored until AFTER the loop completes...
- (IBAction)start {
self.showLabel.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"5"];
for (NSString *p in self.currentNumber) {
NSLog(#"%#", p);
sleep(3);
}
}
#end
What am I missing?
(If you want to see the source files, you can get them at https://github.com/lamarrg/iterate
As you've realized, the UI will only update when the main thread is processing events. In a loop, it won't be.
There's a couple ways around this.
The simplest is to perform your loop in a background thread. There's a wrinkle, though: This will allow the user to continue to interact with your UI. And also, the UI can only be updated from the main thread.
You'll want to dispatch your work to the background, then have the background dispatch your work back to the main thread.
This sounds complicated, and it is. Thankfully, Apple added blocks and Grand Central Dispatch to Objective-C. You can use those to break down the chunks of code and make sure they're executed on the correct thread.
- (IBAction)start {
[self disableMyUI];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_NORMAL, 0), ^{
// this code will be executed "later", probably after start has returned.
// (in all cases, later should be considered "soon but not immediately.")
for (NSString *p in self.currentNumber) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(),^{
// this code will be executed "later" by the main loop.
// You may have already moved on to the next thing, and even
// dispatched the next UI update.
// Don't worry; the main queue does things in order.
self.showLabel.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#", p];
});
sleep(3); // do your heavy lifting here, but keep in mind:
// you're on a background thread.
}
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue,^{
// this occurs "later," but after other all other UI events queued
// to the main queue.
[self enableMyUI];
});
}
// this line of code will run before work is complete
}
You'll have to write disableMyUI and enableMyUI; make sure they disable everything (including the back button if you're using navigation, the tab bar if you're using a tab bar controller, etc).
Another way around this is to use a NSTimer. However, if you do this you're still doing your work on the main thread. It'll work if you can split your work into predictable, small pieces, but you're better off doing it on a background thread.
One thing to keep in mind: Although you're not likely to run into problems while developing, doing heavy work on the main thread will lead to user crashes. On iOS there is a process that watches if applications are responding to events, such as drawing updates. If an application isn't responding to events in a timely fashion, it will be terminated. So living with the lack of UI updates isn't an option for you; you need to only do time consuming operations from background thread.
See also:
Programming with Objective-C: Working with Blocks
If you want to update the label periodically, don't use sleep. If you call it on the main thread you'll be blocking the UI, which is not very desirable.
Use a NSTimer instead, making it fire every N seconds.
Something like this will do:
- (void)startUpdatingLabel {
[NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:0 target:self selector:#selector(updateLabelWithIndex:) userInfo:#0 repeats:NO];
}
- (void)updateLabel:(NSTimer *)timer {
NSInteger index = [timer.userInfo integerValue];
if (index >= self.currentNumber.count) {
return;
}
self.showLabel.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#", self.currentNumber[index]];
[NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:3 target:self selector:#selector(updateLabelWithIndex:) userInfo:#(index+1) repeats:NO];
}
Every time updateLabel: is invoked it schedules a new timer which will call it again in 3 seconds. Each time the index value is increased and passed along.
Related
Question:
How can I make sure that the code executed due to a runloop event (timer, user interaction, performSelector, etc) have the same concept of "now"?
Background:
Say that event handler takes 100ms to execute, that means that [NSDate date] will return a slightly different "now" depending on when in the execution you make the call. If you are very unlucky with the timing you might even end up with different dates between the calls.
This creates problems for things that rely on the current time for doing various calculations since those calculations can differ during the execution.
Of course, for a specific event handler you could just store the date in the AppDelegate or similar or pass it on in each call starting from the entry point.
However, I want something safer and automatic. Ideally I want to know at what time the current run loop started processing the event. Something I can simply replace [NSDate date] with and always get the same result until the next event is fired.
I looked into the documentation of NSRunLoop without much luck. I also looked into CADisplayLink for potential workarounds. Neither provided a clear cut answer.
It feels like this should be a common thing to need, not something that needs "workarounds". My guess is that I am looking in the wrong places or using the wrong search terms.
Code Example:
UIView *_foo, _fie;
NSDate *_hideDate;
- (void)handleTimer
{
[self checkVisible:_foo];
[self checkVisible:_fie];
}
- (void)checkVisible:(UIView *)view
{
view.hidden = [_hideDate timeIntervalSinceNow] < 0];
}
In this case we could end up with _fie being hidden when _foo is still visible since "now" has changed by a very small amount between calls.
This is a very simplified example in which a fix is trivial by simply calling [NSDate date] and sending that instance to all callers. It is the general case that I am interested in though where call chains might be very deep, cyclic, re-entrant, etc.
NSRunLoop is a wrapper for CFRunLoop. CFRunLoop has features that NSRunLoop doesn't expose, so sometimes you have to drop down to the CF level.
One such feature is observers, which are callbacks you can register to be called when the run loop enters different phases. The phase you want in this case is an after-waiting observer, which is called after the run loop receives an event (from a source, or due to a timer firing, or due to a block being added to the main queue).
Let's add a wakeDate property to NSRunLoop:
// NSRunLoop+wakeDate.h
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#interface NSRunLoop (wakeDate)
#property (nonatomic, strong, readonly) NSDate *wakeDate;
#end
With this category, we can ask an NSRunLoop for its wakeDate property any time we want, for example like this:
#import "AppDelegate.h"
#import "NSRunLoop+wakeDate.h"
#implementation AppDelegate
- (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions {
NSTimer *timer = [NSTimer timerWithTimeInterval:0.5 repeats:YES block:^(NSTimer *timer){
NSLog(#"timer: %.6f", NSRunLoop.currentRunLoop.wakeDate.timeIntervalSinceReferenceDate);
}];
[NSRunLoop.currentRunLoop addTimer:timer forMode:NSRunLoopCommonModes];
return YES;
}
#end
To implement this property, we'll create a WakeDateRecord class that we can attach to the run loop as an associated object:
// NSRunLoop+wakeDate.m
#import "NSRunLoop+wakeDate.h"
#import <objc/runtime.h>
#interface WakeDateRecord: NSObject
#property (nonatomic, strong) NSDate *date;
- (instancetype)initWithRunLoop:(NSRunLoop *)runLoop;
#end
static const void *wakeDateRecordKey = &wakeDateRecordKey;
#implementation NSRunLoop (wakeDate)
- (NSDate *)wakeDate {
WakeDateRecord *record = objc_getAssociatedObject(self, wakeDateRecordKey);
if (record == nil) {
record = [[WakeDateRecord alloc] initWithRunLoop:self];
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, wakeDateRecordKey, record, OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC);
}
return record.date;
}
#end
The run loop can run in different modes, and although there are a small number of common modes, new modes can in theory be created on the fly. If you want an observer to be called in a particular mode, you have to register it for that mode. So, to ensure that the reported date is always correct, we'll remember not just the date but also the mode in which we recorded the date:
#implementation WakeDateRecord {
NSRunLoop *_runLoop;
NSRunLoopMode _dateMode;
NSDate *_date;
CFRunLoopObserverRef _observer;
}
To initialize, we just store the run loop and create the observer:
- (instancetype)initWithRunLoop:(NSRunLoop *)runLoop {
if (self = [super init]) {
_runLoop = runLoop;
_observer = CFRunLoopObserverCreateWithHandler(nil, kCFRunLoopEntry | kCFRunLoopAfterWaiting, true, -2000000, ^(CFRunLoopObserverRef observer, CFRunLoopActivity activity) {
[self setDate];
});
}
return self;
}
When asked for the date, we first check whether the current mode is different from the date in which we recorded the mode. If so, then the date wasn't updated when the run loop awoke in the current mode. That means the observer wasn't registered for the current mode, so we should register it now and update the date now:
- (NSDate *)date {
NSRunLoopMode mode = _runLoop.currentMode;
if (![_dateMode isEqualToString:mode]) {
// My observer didn't run when the run loop awoke in this mode, so it must not be registered in this mode yet.
NSLog(#"debug: WakeDateRecord registering in mode %#", mode);
CFRunLoopAddObserver(_runLoop.getCFRunLoop, _observer, (__bridge CFRunLoopMode)mode);
[self setDate];
}
return _date;
}
When we update the date, we also need to update the stored mode:
- (void)setDate {
_date = [NSDate date];
_dateMode = _runLoop.currentMode;
}
#end
An important warning about this solution: the observer fires once per pass through the run loop. The run loop can service multiple timers and multiple blocks added to the main queue during a single pass. All of the serviced timers or blocks will see the same wakeDate.
I have this below error
-[__NSPlaceholderArray initWithObjects:count:]: attempt to insert nil object from objects[1539]
It happens sometimes I try to tap several times on screen, because code is little, so all the code is pasted below
#interface ViewController ()
#property (nonatomic,weak) NSTimer *timer;
#property (nonatomic,strong)NSMutableArray * testArray;
#property (nonatomic,strong) dispatch_queue_t queue1;
#property (nonatomic,strong) dispatch_queue_t queue2;
#end
#implementation ViewController
- (void)viewDidLoad {
[super viewDidLoad];
self.testArray = [NSMutableArray array];
_queue1 = dispatch_queue_create("test", DISPATCH_QUEUE_CONCURRENT);
_queue2 = dispatch_queue_create("test",DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL);
NSTimer * timer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:0.01 target:self selector:#selector(addObjectforArray) userInfo:nil repeats:YES];
[timer fire];
}
- (void)touchesBegan:(NSSet<UITouch *> *)touches withEvent:(UIEvent *)event {
dispatch_async(_queue2, ^{
NSLog(#"touchesBeganThread:%#",[NSThread currentThread]);
NSArray * testTempArray = [NSArray arrayWithArray:self.testArray];
for (UIView *view in testTempArray) {
NSLog(#"%#",view);
}
});
}
- (void)addObjectforArray{
dispatch_async(_queue1, ^{
NSLog(#"addObjectThread:%#",[NSThread currentThread]);
[self.testArray addObject:[[UIView alloc]init]];
});
}
I can not understand why this happens, if I change _queue1 to DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL, it becomes normal.
How can I understand this issue? If anyone could shed some light, that would be wonderful.
There are multiple problems in your code. They can cause all sorts of bugs randomly.
UIView should be created in the main thread using dispatch_get_main_queue().
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/uikit
For the most part, use UIKit classes only from your app’s main thread or main dispatch queue. This restriction applies to classes derived from
UIResponder
or that involve manipulating your app’s user interface in any way.
The property testArray is nonatomic but being accessed in two threads. The property should be atomic. It runs fine at this moment but it is fragile. If in the future testArray mutates, the app will crash randomly.
NSArray is not thread-safe. It should be locked while accessing in multiple threads or protected by other means.
As pointed out by #Nirmalsinh, the dispatch_async is redundant (actually harmful).
I am not sure if you have heavily simplified your code or only to test something. If you are not doing long running work, you might want to use dispatch_get_main_queue() in dispatch_async. It will save you from a lot of troubles.
It seems you are inserting nil value into your array. You cannot add nil to array or dictionary.
- (void)addObjectforArray{
NSLog(#"addObjectThread:%#",[NSThread currentThread]);
UIView *view = [[UIView alloc] init];
if(view != nil)
[self.testArray addObject:view];
}
There is no required to use a queue in the method. You are already using NSTimer for same.
Try to check above. It will help you.
I have a UITextfield and a UIButton. The user can enter, for example, search word such as "dog" or "cat" and it will trigger a method in another class that runs on a custom dispatch GCD queue to fetch the images (around 100 or so).
Everything works fine, except if the user in the midst of fetching, decides to change and enter another search word such as "cat" and then press the fetch button, I would like to be able to stop that thread / method while it is fetching the images from the previous search term.
I have thought about NSThread (something I never used before) or blocks (to get notified once the method has finished running), but the problem with blocks is, I will get notified once the method had finished doing its thing, but what I need here is to tell it to stop fetching (because the user has decided on another search and entered another search term).
Can someone please cite me with some samples, as to how we can be able to stop a loop / method while it is running on a custom GCD thread before it is finished? Thanks in advance.
I'm using NSOperationand NSOperationQueue to cluster markers on a map in the background and to cancel the operation if necessary.
The function to cluster the markers is implemented in a subclass of NSOperation:
ClusterMarker.h:
#class ClusterMarker;
#protocol ClusterMarkerDelegate <NSObject>
- (void)clusterMarkerDidFinish:(ClusterMarker *)clusterMarker;
#end
#interface ClusterMarker : NSOperation
-(id)initWithMarkers:(NSSet *)markerSet delegate:(id<ClusterMarkerDelegate>)delegate;
// the "return value"
#property (nonatomic, strong) NSSet *markerSet;
// use the delegate pattern to inform someone that the operation has finished
#property (nonatomic, weak) id<ClusterMarkerDelegate> delegate;
#end
and ClusterMarker.m:
#implementation ClusterMarker
-(id)initWithMarkers:(NSSet *)markerSet delegate:(id<ClusterMarkerDelegate>)delegate
{
if (self = [super init]) {
self.markerSet = markerSet;
self.delegate = delegate;
}
return self;
}
- (void)main {
#autoreleasepool {
if (self.isCancelled) {
return;
}
// perform some Überalgorithmus that fills self.markerSet (the "return value")
// inform the delegate that you have finished
[(NSObject *)self.delegate performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(clusterMarkerDidFinish:) withObject:self waitUntilDone:NO];
}
}
#end
You could use your controller to manage the queue,
self.operationQueue = [[NSOperationQueue alloc] init];
self.operationQueue.name = #"Überalgorithmus.TheKillerApp.makemyday.com";
// make sure to have only one algorithm running
self.operationQueue.maxConcurrentOperationCount = 1;
to enqueue operations, kill previous operations and the like,
ClusterMarker *clusterMarkerOperation = [[ClusterMarker alloc] initWithMarkers:self.xmlMarkerSet delegate:self];
// this sets isCancelled in ClusterMarker to true. you might want to check that variable frequently in the algorithm
[self.operationQueue cancelAllOperations];
[self.operationQueue addOperation:clusterMarkerOperation];
and to respond to the callbacks when the operation has finished:
- (void)clusterMarkerDidFinish:(ClusterMarker *)clusterMarker
{
self.clusterMarkerSet = clusterMarker.markerSet;
GMSProjection *projection = [self.mapView projection];
for (MapMarker *m in self.clusterMarkerSet) {
m.coordinate = [projection coordinateForPoint:m.point];
}
// DebugLog(#"now clear map and refreshData: self.clusterMarkerSet.count=%d", self.clusterMarkerSet.count);
[self.mapView clear];
[self refreshDataInGMSMapView:self.mapView];
}
If I remember correctly I used this tutorial on raywenderlich.com as a starter.
I would recommend using NSOperation as it has cancel method which will cancel the current running operation.
When to copy a block? The document says, blocks are "deleted when execution returns from the scope in which they are defined.This means you can’t return them directly from a function. If blocks could only be used while their defining scope was still on the call stack, they wouldn’t be nearly as useful as they actually are"
So, here is code which I tried, hoping the block will be deleted once execution is completed in viewDidLoad.
MyReaderController.h
#interface MyReaderController : UIViewController
{
myBlockVar aBlockVar;
}
-(myBlockVar) getABlock;
#end
MyReaderController.m
#implementation MyReaderController
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
[super viewDidLoad];
aBlockVar=[self getABlock];
NSLog(#"Block Result = %f",aBlockVar(1));
}
-(void) viewDidDisappear:(BOOL)animated{
[super viewDidDisappear:animated];
NSLog(#"Block Exists even after the execution completes=%# %f",aBlockVar,aBlockVar(5));
}
-(myBlockVar) getABlock{
return ^(int var){return 4.0f;};
}
#end
So, does this code require viewDidLoad to be changed to as coded below, if not then when should I use it.
- (void) viewDidLoad{
[super viewDidLoad];
aBlockVar=Block_copy([self getABlock]);
NSLog(#"Block Result = %f",aBlockVar(1));
}
PART 2
Later on I tried with this following code, hoping now it will return aBlockVar as nil obj in
viewDidDisappear.
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
[super viewDidLoad];
Blocker *blocker=[[Blocker alloc] init];
myBlockVar myVar=[blocker getABlock];
aBlockVar=myVar;
NSLog(#"Block Result = %f",aBlockVar(1));
blocker=nil;
myVar=nil;
}
Blocker.m
#import "Blocker.h"
#implementation Blocker
-(myBlockVar) getABlock{
return ^(int var){return 4.0f;};
}
#end
Are you using ARC? If so, you don't need to use Block_copy or Block_release.
If you are, then you are correct with your revised code, as Block_copy takes it off the stack and into the heap where it is has an effective retain count of 1. You would also need to call Block_release where appropriate, when finally finished with the block, to bring its balance the copy, effectively bringing the retain count back to 0.
use #property (nonatomic, copy) (int)(^myBlock)(void);
let the system do all right memory management for you!
initialize:
self.myBlock = ^int(void){
return 4.0;
};
if you want to destroy your block somewhere do self.myBlock = NULL;
An addendum to the existing answers:
Even if you're using ARC, there are certain situations where you still need Block_copy.
For example, extracting a block argument from an NSInvocation and using it after the function returns.
- (void)interceptInvocation:(NSInvocation *)call {
BlockType block;
[call getArgument:&block atIndex:2]; // ARC cannot see this happen
block = (__bridge BlockType)Block_copy((__bridge void *)block);
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
block();
});
}
Without the copy, the block will have been deallocated by the time it is run.
It appears a matching Block_release is not necessary, as when I added one it crashed due to too many releases.
with arc never, without arc:
: when you have a STACK block and want to keep it as a HEAP block (e.g. when you have a block in a function and want it to live after you exited the function!)
You need to block_copy it then.
also you need retain/release it as you would a NSString so (using block_copy/block_release)
If you are an advanced user of drawRect, you will know that of course drawRect will not actually run until "all processing is finished."
setNeedsDisplay flags a view as invalidated and the OS, and basically waits until all processing is done. This can be infuriating in the common situation where you want to have:
a view controller 1
starts some function 2
which incrementally 3
creates a more and more complicated artwork and 4
at each step, you setNeedsDisplay (wrong!) 5
until all the work is done 6
Of course, when you do the above 1-6, all that happens is that drawRect is run once only after step 6.
Your goal is for the view to be refreshed at point 5. What to do?
If I understand your question correctly, there is a simple solution to this. During your long-running routine you need to tell the current runloop to process for a single iteration (or more, of the runloop) at certain points in your own processing. e.g, when you want to update the display. Any views with dirty update regions will have their drawRect: methods called when you run the runloop.
To tell the current runloop to process for one iteration (and then return to you...):
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] runMode: NSDefaultRunLoopMode beforeDate: [NSDate date]];
Here's an example of an (inefficient) long running routine with a corresponding drawRect - each in the context of a custom UIView:
- (void) longRunningRoutine:(id)sender
{
srand( time( NULL ) );
CGFloat x = 0;
CGFloat y = 0;
[_path moveToPoint: CGPointMake(0, 0)];
for ( int j = 0 ; j < 1000 ; j++ )
{
x = 0;
y = (CGFloat)(rand() % (int)self.bounds.size.height);
[_path addLineToPoint: CGPointMake( x, y)];
y = 0;
x = (CGFloat)(rand() % (int)self.bounds.size.width);
[_path addLineToPoint: CGPointMake( x, y)];
x = self.bounds.size.width;
y = (CGFloat)(rand() % (int)self.bounds.size.height);
[_path addLineToPoint: CGPointMake( x, y)];
y = self.bounds.size.height;
x = (CGFloat)(rand() % (int)self.bounds.size.width);
[_path addLineToPoint: CGPointMake( x, y)];
[self setNeedsDisplay];
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] runMode: NSDefaultRunLoopMode beforeDate: [NSDate date]];
}
[_path removeAllPoints];
}
- (void) drawRect:(CGRect)rect
{
CGContextRef ctx = UIGraphicsGetCurrentContext();
CGContextSetFillColorWithColor( ctx, [UIColor blueColor].CGColor );
CGContextFillRect( ctx, rect);
CGContextSetStrokeColorWithColor( ctx, [UIColor whiteColor].CGColor );
[_path stroke];
}
And here is a fully working sample demonstrating this technique.
With some tweaking you can probably adjust this to make the rest of the UI (i.e. user-input) responsive as well.
Update (caveat for using this technique)
I just want to say that I agree with much of the feedback from others here saying this solution (calling runMode: to force a call to drawRect:) isn't necessarily a great idea. I've answered this question with what I feel is a factual "here's how" answer to the stated question, and I am not intending to promote this as "correct" architecture. Also, I'm not saying there might not be other (better?) ways to achieve the same effect - certainly there may be other approaches that I wasn't aware of.
Update (response to the Joe's sample code and performance question)
The performance slowdown you're seeing is the overhead of running the runloop on each iteration of your drawing code, which includes rendering the layer to the screen as well as all of the other processing the runloop does such as input gathering and processing.
One option might be to invoke the runloop less frequently.
Another option might be to optimize your drawing code. As it stands (and I don't know if this is your actual app, or just your sample...) there are a handful of things you could do to make it faster. The first thing I would do is move all the UIGraphicsGet/Save/Restore code outside the loop.
From an architectural standpoint however, I would highly recommend considering some of the other approaches mentioned here. I see no reason why you can't structure your drawing to happen on a background thread (algorithm unchanged), and use a timer or other mechanism to signal the main thread to update it's UI on some frequency until the drawing is complete. I think most of the folks who've participated in the discussion would agree that this would be the "correct" approach.
Updates to the user interface happen at the end of the current pass through the run loop. These updates are performed on the main thread, so anything that runs for a long time in the main thread (lengthy calculations, etc.) will prevent the interface updates from being started. Additionally, anything that runs for a while on the main thread will also cause your touch handling to be unresponsive.
This means that there is no way to "force" a UI refresh to occur from some other point in a process running on the main thread. The previous statement is not entirely correct, as Tom's answer shows. You can allow the run loop to come to completion in the middle of operations performed on the main thread. However, this still may reduce the responsiveness of your application.
In general, it is recommended that you move anything that takes a while to perform to a background thread so that the user interface can remain responsive. However, any updates you wish to perform to the UI need to be done back on the main thread.
Perhaps the easiest way to do this under Snow Leopard and iOS 4.0+ is to use blocks, like in the following rudimentary sample:
dispatch_queue_t main_queue = dispatch_get_main_queue();
dispatch_async(queue, ^{
// Do some work
dispatch_async(main_queue, ^{
// Update the UI
});
});
The Do some work part of the above could be a lengthy calculation, or an operation that loops over multiple values. In this example, the UI is only updated at the end of the operation, but if you wanted continuous progress tracking in your UI, you could place the dispatch to the main queue where ever you needed a UI update to be performed.
For older OS versions, you can break off a background thread manually or through an NSOperation. For manual background threading, you can use
[NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:#selector(doWork) toTarget:self withObject:nil];
or
[self performSelectorInBackground:#selector(doWork) withObject:nil];
and then to update the UI you can use
[self performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(updateProgress) withObject:nil waitUntilDone:NO];
Note that I've found the NO argument in the previous method to be needed to get constant UI updates while dealing with a continuous progress bar.
This sample application I created for my class illustrates how to use both NSOperations and queues for performing background work and then updating the UI when done. Also, my Molecules application uses background threads for processing new structures, with a status bar that is updated as this progresses. You can download the source code to see how I achieved this.
You can do this repeatedly in a loop and it'll work fine, no threads, no messing with the runloop, etc.
[CATransaction begin];
// modify view or views
[view setNeedsDisplay];
[CATransaction commit];
If there is an implicit transaction already in place prior to the loop you need to commit that with [CATransaction commit] before this will work.
In order to get drawRect called the soonest (which is not necessarily immediately, as the OS may still wait until, for instance, the next hardware display refresh, etc.), an app should idle it's UI run loop as soon as possible, by exiting any and all methods in the UI thread, and for a non-zero amount of time.
You can either do this in the main thread by chopping any processing that takes more than an animation frame time into shorter chunks and scheduling continuing work only after a short delay (so drawRect might run in the gaps), or by doing the processing in a background thread, with a periodic call to performSelectorOnMainThread to do a setNeedsDisplay at some reasonable animation frame rate.
A non-OpenGL method to update the display near immediately (which means at the very next hardware display refresh or three) is by swapping visible CALayer contents with an image or CGBitmap that you have drawn into. An app can do Quartz drawing into a Core Graphics bitmap at pretty much at any time.
New added answer:
Please see Brad Larson's comments below and Christopher Lloyd's comment on another answer here as the hint leading towards this solution.
[ CATransaction flush ];
will cause drawRect to be called on views on which a setNeedsDisplay request has been done, even if the flush is done from inside a method that is blocking the UI run loop.
Note that, when blocking the UI thread, a Core Animation flush is required to update changing CALayer contents as well. So, for animating graphic content to show progress, these may both end up being forms of the same thing.
New added note to new added answer above:
Do not flush faster than your drawRect or animation drawing can complete, as this might queue up flushes, causing weird animation effects.
Without questioning the wisdom of this (which you ought to do), you can do:
[myView setNeedsDisplay];
[[myView layer] displayIfNeeded];
-setNeedsDisplay will mark the view as needing to be redrawn.
-displayIfNeeded will force the view's backing layer to redraw, but only if it has been marked as needing to be displayed.
I will emphasize, however, that your question is indicative of an architecture that could use some re-working. In all but exceptionally rare cases, you should never need to or want to force a view to redraw immediately. UIKit with not built with that use-case in mind, and if it works, consider yourself lucky.
Have you tried doing the heavy processing on a secondary thread and calling back to the main thread to schedule view updates? NSOperationQueue makes this sort of thing pretty easy.
Sample code that takes an array of NSURLs as input and asynchronously downloads them all, notifying the main thread as each of them is finished and saved.
- (void)fetchImageWithURLs:(NSArray *)urlArray {
[self.retriveAvatarQueue cancelAllOperations];
self.retriveAvatarQueue = nil;
NSOperationQueue *opQueue = [[NSOperationQueue alloc] init];
for (NSUInteger i=0; i<[urlArray count]; i++) {
NSURL *url = [urlArray objectAtIndex:i];
NSInvocation *inv = [NSInvocation invocationWithMethodSignature:[self methodSignatureForSelector:#selector(cacheImageWithIndex:andURL:)]];
[inv setTarget:self];
[inv setSelector:#selector(cacheImageWithIndex:andURL:)];
[inv setArgument:&i atIndex:2];
[inv setArgument:&url atIndex:3];
NSInvocationOperation *invOp = [[NSInvocationOperation alloc] initWithInvocation:inv];
[opQueue addOperation:invOp];
[invOp release];
}
self.retriveAvatarQueue = opQueue;
[opQueue release];
}
- (void)cacheImageWithIndex:(NSUInteger)index andURL:(NSURL *)url {
NSData *imageData = [NSData dataWithContentsOfURL:url];
NSFileManager *fileManager = [NSFileManager defaultManager];
NSString *filePath = PATH_FOR_IMG_AT_INDEX(index);
NSError *error = nil;
// Save the file
if (![fileManager createFileAtPath:filePath contents:imageData attributes:nil]) {
DLog(#"Error saving file at %#", filePath);
}
// Notifiy the main thread that our file is saved.
[self performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(imageLoadedAtPath:) withObject:filePath waitUntilDone:NO];
}
I think, the most complete answer comes from the Jeffrey Sambell's blog post 'Asynchronous Operations in iOS with Grand Central Dispatch' and it worked for me!
It's basically the same solution as proposed by Brad above but fully explained in terms of OSX/IOS concurrency model.
The dispatch_get_current_queue function will return the current queue
from which the block is dispatched and the dispatch_get_main_queue
function will return the main queue where your UI is running.
The dispatch_get_main_queue function is very useful for updating the
iOS app’s UI as UIKit methods are not thread safe (with a few
exceptions) so any calls you make to update UI elements must always be
done from the main queue.
A typical GCD call would look something like this:
// Doing something on the main thread
dispatch_queue_t myQueue = dispatch_queue_create("My Queue",NULL);
dispatch_async(myQueue, ^{
// Perform long running process
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
// Update the UI
});
});
// Continue doing other stuff on the
// main thread while process is running.
And here goes my working example (iOS 6+). It displays frames of a stored video using the AVAssetReader class:
//...prepare the AVAssetReader* asset_reader earlier and start reading frames now:
[asset_reader startReading];
dispatch_queue_t readerQueue = dispatch_queue_create("Reader Queue", NULL);
dispatch_async(readerQueue, ^{
CMSampleBufferRef buffer;
while ( [asset_reader status]==AVAssetReaderStatusReading )
{
buffer = [asset_reader_output copyNextSampleBuffer];
if (buffer!=nil)
{
//The point is here: to use the main queue for actual UI operations
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
// Update the UI using the AVCaptureVideoDataOutputSampleBufferDelegate style function
[self captureOutput:nil didOutputSampleBuffer:buffer fromConnection:nil];
CFRelease (buffer);
});
}
}
});
The first part of this sample may be found here in Damian's answer.
I'd like to offer a clean solution to the given problem.
I agree with other posters that in an ideal situation all the heavy lifting should be done in a background thread, however there are times when this simply isn't possible because the time consuming part requires lots of accessing to non thread-safe methods such as those offered by UIKit. In my case, initialising my UI is time consuming and there's nothing I can run in the background, so my best option is to update a progress bar during the init.
However, once we think in terms of the ideal GCD approach, the solution is actually a simple. We do all the work in a background thread, dividing it into chucks that are called synchronously on the main thread. The run loop will be run for each chuck, updating the UI and any progress bars etc.
- (void)myInit
{
// Start the work in a background thread.
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(0, 0), ^{
// Back to the main thread for a chunk of code
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
...
// Update progress bar
self.progressIndicator.progress = ...:
});
// Next chunk
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
...
// Update progress bar
self.progressIndicator.progress = ...:
});
...
});
}
Of course, this is essentially the same as Brad's technique, but his answer doesn't quite address the issue at hand - that of running a lot of non thread safe code while updating the UI periodically.
Joe -- if you are willing to set it up so that your lengthy processing all happens inside of drawRect, you can make it work. I just wrote a test project. It works. See code below.
LengthyComputationTestAppDelegate.h:
#import <UIKit/UIKit.h>
#interface LengthyComputationTestAppDelegate : NSObject <UIApplicationDelegate> {
UIWindow *window;
}
#property (nonatomic, retain) IBOutlet UIWindow *window;
#end
LengthComputationTestAppDelegate.m:
#import "LengthyComputationTestAppDelegate.h"
#import "Incrementer.h"
#import "IncrementerProgressView.h"
#implementation LengthyComputationTestAppDelegate
#synthesize window;
#pragma mark -
#pragma mark Application lifecycle
- (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions {
// Override point for customization after application launch.
IncrementerProgressView *ipv = [[IncrementerProgressView alloc]initWithFrame:self.window.bounds];
[self.window addSubview:ipv];
[ipv release];
[self.window makeKeyAndVisible];
return YES;
}
Incrementer.h:
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
//singleton object
#interface Incrementer : NSObject {
NSUInteger theInteger_;
}
#property (nonatomic) NSUInteger theInteger;
+(Incrementer *) sharedIncrementer;
-(NSUInteger) incrementForTimeInterval: (NSTimeInterval) timeInterval;
-(BOOL) finishedIncrementing;
incrementer.m:
#import "Incrementer.h"
#implementation Incrementer
#synthesize theInteger = theInteger_;
static Incrementer *inc = nil;
-(void) increment {
theInteger_++;
}
-(BOOL) finishedIncrementing {
return (theInteger_>=100000000);
}
-(NSUInteger) incrementForTimeInterval: (NSTimeInterval) timeInterval {
NSTimeInterval negativeTimeInterval = -1*timeInterval;
NSDate *startDate = [NSDate date];
while (!([self finishedIncrementing]) && [startDate timeIntervalSinceNow] > negativeTimeInterval)
[self increment];
return self.theInteger;
}
-(id) init {
if (self = [super init]) {
self.theInteger = 0;
}
return self;
}
#pragma mark --
#pragma mark singleton object methods
+ (Incrementer *) sharedIncrementer {
#synchronized(self) {
if (inc == nil) {
inc = [[Incrementer alloc]init];
}
}
return inc;
}
+ (id)allocWithZone:(NSZone *)zone {
#synchronized(self) {
if (inc == nil) {
inc = [super allocWithZone:zone];
return inc; // assignment and return on first allocation
}
}
return nil; // on subsequent allocation attempts return nil
}
- (id)copyWithZone:(NSZone *)zone
{
return self;
}
- (id)retain {
return self;
}
- (unsigned)retainCount {
return UINT_MAX; // denotes an object that cannot be released
}
- (void)release {
//do nothing
}
- (id)autorelease {
return self;
}
#end
IncrementerProgressView.m:
#import "IncrementerProgressView.h"
#implementation IncrementerProgressView
#synthesize progressLabel = progressLabel_;
#synthesize nextUpdateTimer = nextUpdateTimer_;
-(id) initWithFrame:(CGRect)frame {
if (self = [super initWithFrame: frame]) {
progressLabel_ = [[UILabel alloc]initWithFrame:CGRectMake(20, 40, 300, 30)];
progressLabel_.font = [UIFont systemFontOfSize:26];
progressLabel_.adjustsFontSizeToFitWidth = YES;
progressLabel_.textColor = [UIColor blackColor];
[self addSubview:progressLabel_];
}
return self;
}
-(void) drawRect:(CGRect)rect {
[self.nextUpdateTimer invalidate];
Incrementer *shared = [Incrementer sharedIncrementer];
NSUInteger progress = [shared incrementForTimeInterval: 0.1];
self.progressLabel.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Increments performed: %d", progress];
if (![shared finishedIncrementing])
self.nextUpdateTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:0. target:self selector:(#selector(setNeedsDisplay)) userInfo:nil repeats:NO];
}
- (void)dealloc {
[super dealloc];
}
#end
Regarding the original issue:
In a word, you can (A) background the large painting, and call to the foreground for UI updates or (B) arguably controversially there are four 'immediate' methods suggested that do not use a background process. For the result of what works, run the demo program. It has #defines for all five methods.
Alternately per Tom Swift
Tom Swift has explained the amazing idea of quite simply manipulating the run loop. Here's how you trigger the run loop:
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] runMode: NSDefaultRunLoopMode beforeDate: [NSDate date]];
This is a truly amazing piece of engineering. Of course one should be extremely careful when manipulating the run loop and as many pointed out this approach is strictly for experts.
However, a bizarre problem arises ...
Even though a number of the methods work, they don't actually "work" because there is a bizarre progressive-slow-down artifact you will see clearly in the demo.
Scroll to the 'answer' I pasted in below, showing the console output - you can see how it progressively slows.
Here's the new SO question:
Mysterious "progressive slowing" problem in run loop / drawRect
Here is V2 of the demo app...
http://www.fileswap.com/dl/p8lU3gAi/stepwiseDrawingV2.zip.html
You will see it tests all five methods,
#ifdef TOMSWIFTMETHOD
[self setNeedsDisplay];
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop]
runMode:NSDefaultRunLoopMode beforeDate:[NSDate date]];
#endif
#ifdef HOTPAW
[self setNeedsDisplay];
[CATransaction flush];
#endif
#ifdef LLOYDMETHOD
[CATransaction begin];
[self setNeedsDisplay];
[CATransaction commit];
#endif
#ifdef DDLONG
[self setNeedsDisplay];
[[self layer] displayIfNeeded];
#endif
#ifdef BACKGROUNDMETHOD
// here, the painting is being done in the bg, we have been
// called here in the foreground to inval
[self setNeedsDisplay];
#endif
You can see for yourself which methods work and which do not.
you can see the bizarre "progressive-slow-down". Why does it happen?
you can see with the controversial TOMSWIFT method, there is actually no problem at all with responsiveness. tap for response at any time (but still the bizarre "progressive-slow-down" problem)
So the overwhelming thing is this weird "progressive-slow-down": on each iteration, for unknown reasons, the time taken for a loop decreases. Note that this applies to both doing it "properly" (background look) or using one of the 'immediate' methods.
Practical solutions?
For anyone reading in the future, if you are actually unable to get this to work in production code because of the "mystery progressive slowdown", Felz and Void have each presented astounding solutions in the other specific question.