I have a MainViewController, and I want to add two UITableView's to it, each with different cells. But I don't want to clog up my MainViewController code by checking in the table delegate methods which table it is, and then acting on it. It gets too messy.
So I thought I would subclass UITableView and let it handle the cellForRow and other table methods by itself, and this way when I want to add a table to MainViewController, all I'd have to is
CustomTable *customTable = [[CustomTable alloc] init];
[self.view addSubview:customTable];
and all the delegate methods would be handled in that class, leaving my MainViewController clutter free.
Am I approaching this wrong? Should I be subclassing UITableViewController instead? What's the difference?
When to subclasss UITableView? Not now.
Create two classes, which are member variables of your view controller. Point the table view delegates at each of your two new classes.
In Cocoa you tend to combine classes rather than inherit from them as you usually do in Java and C#.
In 3 years of professional working as a objective-c programmer, I didn't need to subclass UITableView once, the patterns, cocoa is depending on, — MVC and delegations (with using protocols), are just simple yet strong enough. And populating a tableview is just one of the best examples.
Make sure, you understand all this topics, as otherwise you will find yourself fighting the framework constantly.
Related
I have a lot of common logic, therefore all my viewControllers inherit from BaseViewController, BaseDetailsViewController or BaseWebViewController. The last two inherit from BaseViewController which inherits from UIViewController. The problem is I cannot use tableViews with static cells because my BaseDetailsViewController is not inheriting from UITableViewController.
I'v never used and inherited UITableViewController because the same could be achieved by inheriting from UIViewController, wiring it with an added UITableView and having implemented datasource and delegate methods. Therefore for the form type screens (SignUp or other data input screens), I use my own BaseDetailsViewController which adds nice and handy methods (input validation, custom styling, scrolling keyboard, handles input field navigation and etc.)
Using UITableViewController has two real benefits: 1) keyboard scrolling (if you use text fields) and 2) easy creation of your form UI elements inside on screen. The first benefit is irrelevant for me, because I'v already have my own implementation of this stuff inside BaseDetailsViewController. Regarding the second benefit, I'm creating my form inside scrollView which gives a lot of flexibility but it's a little bit more effort (especially when need to update the screen). Therefore I heard some guys implemented their own UITableViewController and then made it to inherit from their BaseViewController. Therefore I started to dig into this approach.
So far I'v came upon these two approaches:
Recreate your own tableVC. Not clear how to make it work for static cells. Currently my demo app crashes if my ReplaceTableViewController is not implementing numberOfRows and cellForRow, and not shows static cells if I implement them with dummy content.
method-swizzling. Not clear how to change class inheritance by injecting baseViewController inheritance for UITableViewController, thought still not clear which methods are needed to be added.
Anybody tried and want to share?
UPDATE I'm not using storyboards as I promote clean MVC - every screen as component should have its own Model, View (Xib), and controller, all stored in separate files to eliminate merge conflicts of multiple devs in large app projects (30+ screens). And therefore container view with embedded segue to tableViewController is also not an option.
UPDATE2 In case anybody would like to take a look why and how I'm doing this, here's a link to my open source template based new project generator framework which I started to publish recently.
Static cells need a UITableViewController. You can't changed this right now.
But to use static cells in a UITableView outside of a UITableViewController you can use a ContainerView in your Non-Table-UIViewController, where you place a real, separate created UITableViewController working with those static cells.
To share common code between multiple view controllers, inheritance is not that best solution as you found out by yourself while subclassing UIViewController vs. UITableViewController. You can use some sort of composition for sharing code or - especially for objective-c - categories.
Categories are not allowed to have its own properties, but there are workarounds possible with objc_setAssociatedObject.
Another approach would be to not use static cells, but dynamic cells in a UITableView with DataSource-Delegate :)
As you see in my screenshot, to reuse a special TableView with static cells, i place it in other ViewControllers in a ContainerView. Since you are not using storyboards, i am pretty sure that this can also be done by code without storyboard.
I noticed in using UITableView, UICollectionView, UIPickerView, UIScrollView, ..., and numerous other UIKit classes that the UIViewController containing the object instance often bears the role of DataSource and Delegate.
I understand from Apple's documentation what these data source and delegate methods are called, and how to implement them... for a single instance of each class.
My question is, how do you handle different instances in the same UIViewController? For example, if I have two UICollectionViews, or three UIPickerViews, ...., or fifty UIScrollViews? I can implement the data source method only once per UIViewController, but I somehow have to tell the program different instructions?
The only thing I can conceive is a gigantic switch statement or a bunch of cascading if-else if-else comparing the input to the delegate or data source method to each object instance in the UIViewController, which might get out of hand if there are many.
While we're used to using our view controller as the delegate, there's no need to do so. You can actually create NSObject subclasses that conform to the delegate protocol in question. You can then instantiate those objects and use them as the delegates of the UI objects (or whatever) as needed.
For example, consider a scene where I have two text fields, one which permits only numeric values, and one that does not accept numeric values. I can write a separate delegate object for each type of text field.
If implementing this programmatically, I would manually instantiate the two delegate objects, keep some strong references to them in my view controller, and then in viewDidLoad I can set each text field's delegate to be the appropriate delegate object.
If doing this in Interface Builder, you can actually drag an "Object" from the "Object Library" onto the scene (either in the bar above the scene or the document outline to the left of the scene):
You can then specify the class for this object:
Repeat this for all of your delegate objects:
And finally, you can go to your text field and specify the delegate by control dragging to the delegate object you added to the scene:
Doing it in Interface Builder means that it completely takes care of the instantiation of this delegate object for me and I have to do nothing in view controller's code.
Bottom line, if you want distinct behavior for a UI object, you can just instantiate a separate delegate object that manifests the desired behavior, and use that as the UI object's delegate. This pattern of instantiating separate delegate objects is common in iOS 7 custom transitions (where we have all sorts of delegate objects banging about), but can be used in this context, too.
BTW, you can obviously just subclass the UI control in question, too, and further encapsulate the logic there. That works equally well.
By creating referencing outlet for each controller,for example if you have two UITableView ,You can create outlet for each such as table1 and table2. To set number of rows in a section for these table ,you can code like follow
-(NSInteger)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView numberOfRowsInSection:(NSInteger)section
{
if (tableView == table1) {
return 10;
}
if (tableView == table2) {
return 5;
}
return 1;
}
You can create independent UIViews for each tableView or collection view with it's own .swift and .xib (and maybe if they are very similar you can reuse them). Doing that you will have the tableView and collecionView delegate methods in separated files and everything will be more clear. In your view controller you will just have to place the views, but you won't have any delegate methods there.
Well you are asking to differentiate the views with datasource & delegate in a smarter way. But you are overthinking this thing.
Everyone takes the different tableviews or pickers because they wan't be the same.
Otherwise they can be reused.
Now if they are going to be different from others then ultimately somewhere in your code you have to put the if...else or case statements. For example for tableview while setting the value of an UILabel or any value in your UITableViewCell.
If you are facing a such an issue that you have to put that many scrollviews or something in only one UIViewController then its an impossible situation if you are following the coding standards or may be your app design is faulty.
In my iOS app I have a view controller and a UITableView subclass on one of my views. Currently the UITableView manages it's own data (creating connections, and being the delegate which handles the callbacks).
I was wondering if this is best practice? Is it better to run this on the view controller and then pass the data into the table? Does this not matter at all?
Please explain the reasons in addition to answering my question.
Thanks!
It would be more standard to implement the delegate and dataSource methods in the ViewController.
It is quite unusual to subclass the UI*View classes, except to customise drawing. UITableViewCell is a bit of an exception to this rule.
If you find your ViewController getting a bit big you might think about implementing the delegate and dataSource in a separate class.
In addition to mcfedr's answer, views are things that interact with user and it is generally good to separate concepts (unless unavoidable). Also note that historic versions of ios (iirc) view controllers may load/unload views on demand, so any application logic in there may cease to exist.
In this scenario, I generally have only one class... The UIViewController instance that contains the following view hierarchy:
view -> myTableView
With this approach, my UIViewController will:
Have an IBOutlet to a UITableView (myTableView)
Implement methods of UITableViewDelegate
Implement methods of UITableViewDatasource
Set myTableVIew.delegate to self
Set myTableView.datasource to self
When the host UIViewController is the delegate and datasource of your UIViewContoller, all code can exist in one class. This keeps the code of your project tighter but does tightly couple your logic.
The alternative approach would be to subclass UITableView and implement UITableViewDelegate and UITableViewDatasource. This will be a desirable approach if:
You wanted to reuse the UITableView in multiple UIViewController
You wanted to encapsulate the UITableView logic from the UIViewController
Here is the thought process I use:
Am I going to reuse this UITableView and its logic?
Yes -> UIViewController class and UITableView subclass
No -> UIViewController class only
The best practice would depend on the number of programmers involved, the repeatability of the UITableView, coding patterns already established. This is often a matter of preference and I hope my answer shed some light on why you would go either way,
What all does UITableViewController get me that makes it actually useful? Is there any bonus is using it instead of just using a UIViewController for views with UITableViews in them? I ask because I want my views with UITableViews to inherit from a base view controller (which inherits from UIViewController). If I use a UITableViewController then having a base class for all my views becomes more difficult.
Not much. It provides some conveniences, but you never really need it; I often don't use it.
The main things, aside from the automatic setup when you create one in the storyboard, are the three properties tableView, clearsSelectionOnViewWillAppear, and refreshControl. But they don't do anything you can't do yourself.
Well I do think both Retro and matt's answer are correct, from personal experience it is much easier and less "hackY" to use UITableViewController with UIRefreshControl, then trying to get UIRefreshControl work with UIViewController with a UITableView.
Nothing more then the boilerplate code ready for setting the data source and connection to your tableView object, some getters and setter to make your life easy if you not want to put your effort to do the same thing which is available.
But in your case for SubClass its not fit to have UItableViewController
Maybe this is a silly question, but I've bumped into it a number of times during iOS Development.
Sometimes I'll develop a view component that I want to use on multiple screens, so I'll decide to subclass UIView and make it something I can use in multiple places.
Then, I start adding functionality to it. Maybe it needs to respond to an NSNotification, or it is supposed to respond to user touches.
At a certain point, I start wondering if I should really be making a UIViewController subclass, and add it to my UI as a child ViewController.
Is there any consensus on where to draw the line between adding some behaviors to a UIView, and when to create a full UIViewController?
I can't tell you about the consensus, but here's my opinion:
Subclass UIView only when...
You want to do custom drawing
You need to customize some behaviour of an already existing UIView subclass
You have special needs for layouting subviews. Most layouting can be done by UIViewController, though.
Maybe for special touch handling that you can't be done with gesture recognizers
Subclass UIViewController in all other cases. You almost always need a controller anyway, for writing glue code that ties together views and models, or for handling user interaction. Consequently, Apple has made it easy in UIKit to let controllers do all the work and to keep views as "stupid" as possible. For instance, it is very simple to nest controllers to create complex view hierarchies, without the need to have a single view subclass.
An indicator that subclassing UIView is not the first thing one should do is the section titled "Alternatives to Subclassing" in the UIView class reference. An indicator that subclassing UIViewController is the preferred thing to do is that there is no such section in the UIViewController class reference :-)
You should use a controller anytime that you need to handle or control data. Views are supposed to be as stupid as possible, not knowing what they are displaying but rather where. You can easily subclass and reuse ViewControllers. A good example, say you need to retrieve a string (or text) from the user throughout your app via a popover controller and a modal. Create a generic subclass of UIViewController that has a view with a textfield and a button. You can then use this view and it's controller in any capacity you need. Reusing it in the popover, modal or anywhere else (and generally passing the data back through delegation). Since you are dealing with data you should not being using a sole subclass of UIView.
From my experience I subclass UIViewControllers more often then UIViews. It is a little difficult for me to understand if you are solely talking about Containers or reuse of views in general application workflow. Either way though it should be the same.
I've used the embedded view controllers to load reusable table views from time to time. I've found that it's useful sometimes but not always. Communication between the two can be cumbersome, like if you want the embedded controller to communicate back up to the container. Delegation makes it easier but still cumbersome. It also limits you to iOS 6, if I remember right iOS 5 and lower don't support embedded controllers.
If it's just adding methods you can use a category to store some extra methods. I do that a lot on NSManagedObjects that I don't want to subclass and if I regenerate the NSManagedObject from the datamodel I don't lose the code in my categories. Gives me added functionality like calculated fields or conversion methods without having to subclass. If you don't need those methods for a particular instance just exclude the reference to the category.
Subclassing never is bad though IMO.