Can I use Objective-C blocks as properties? - ios

Question

Is it possible to have blocks as properties using the standard property syntax?
Are there any changes for ARC?

Answer 1

#property (nonatomic, copy) void (^simpleBlock)(void);
#property (nonatomic, copy) BOOL (^blockWithParamter)(NSString *input);
If you are going to be repeating the same block in several places use a type def
typedef void(^MyCompletionBlock)(BOOL success, NSError *error);
#property (nonatomic) MyCompletionBlock completion;

Answer 2

Here's an example of how you would accomplish such a task:
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
typedef int (^IntBlock)();
#interface myobj : NSObject
{
IntBlock compare;
}
#property(readwrite, copy) IntBlock compare;
#end
#implementation myobj
#synthesize compare;
- (void)dealloc
{
// need to release the block since the property was declared copy. (for heap
// allocated blocks this prevents a potential leak, for compiler-optimized
// stack blocks it is a no-op)
// Note that for ARC, this is unnecessary, as with all properties, the memory management is handled for you.
[compare release];
[super dealloc];
}
#end
int main () {
#autoreleasepool {
myobj *ob = [[myobj alloc] init];
ob.compare = ^
{
return rand();
};
NSLog(#"%i", ob.compare());
// if not ARC
[ob release];
}
return 0;
}
Now, the only thing that would need to change if you needed to change the type of compare would be the typedef int (^IntBlock)(). If you need to pass two objects to it, change it to this: typedef int (^IntBlock)(id, id), and change your block to:
^ (id obj1, id obj2)
{
return rand();
};
EDIT March 12, 2012:
For ARC, there are no specific changes required, as ARC will manage the blocks for you as long as they are defined as copy. You do not need to set the property to nil in your destructor, either.
For more reading, please check out this document:
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/AutomaticReferenceCounting.html

Answer 3

#property (copy)void
#property (copy)void (^doStuff)(void);
The actual Apple documentation which states precisely what to use:
Apple doco.
Your .h file:
// Here is a block as a property:
//
// Someone passes you a block. You "hold on to it",
// while you do other stuff. Later, you use the block.
//
// The property 'doStuff' will hold the incoming block.
#property (copy)void (^doStuff)(void);
// Here's a method in your class.
// When someone CALLS this method, they PASS IN a block of code,
// which they want to be performed after the method is finished.
-(void)doSomethingAndThenDoThis:(void(^)(void))pleaseDoMeLater;
// We will hold on to that block of code in "doStuff".
Your .m file:
-(void)doSomethingAndThenDoThis:(void(^)(void))pleaseDoMeLater
{
// Regarding the incoming block of code, save it for later:
self.doStuff = pleaseDoMeLater;
// Now do other processing, which could follow various paths,
// involve delays, and so on. Then after everything:
[self _alldone];
}
-(void)_alldone
{
NSLog(#"Processing finished, running the completion block.");
// Here's how to run the block:
if ( self.doStuff != nil )
self.doStuff();
}
Beware of out-of-date example code.
With modern (2014+) systems this is the correct and documented approach.

Answer 4

For posterity / completeness's sake… Here are two FULL examples of how to implement this ridiculously versatile "way of doing things". #Robert's answer is blissfully concise and correct, but here I want to also show ways to actually "define" the blocks.
#interface ReusableClass : NSObject
#property (nonatomic,copy) CALayer*(^layerFromArray)(NSArray*);
#end
#implementation ResusableClass
static NSString const * privateScope = #"Touch my monkey.";
- (CALayer*(^)(NSArray*)) layerFromArray {
return ^CALayer*(NSArray* array){
CALayer *returnLayer = CALayer.layer
for (id thing in array) {
[returnLayer doSomethingCrazy];
[returnLayer setValue:privateScope
forKey:#"anticsAndShenanigans"];
}
return list;
};
}
#end
Silly? Yes. Useful? Hells yeah. Here is a different, "more atomic" way of setting the property.. and a class that is ridiculously useful…
#interface CALayoutDelegator : NSObject
#property (nonatomic,strong) void(^layoutBlock)(CALayer*);
#end
#implementation CALayoutDelegator
- (id) init {
return self = super.init ?
[self setLayoutBlock: ^(CALayer*layer){
for (CALayer* sub in layer.sublayers)
[sub someDefaultLayoutRoutine];
}], self : nil;
}
- (void) layoutSublayersOfLayer:(CALayer*)layer {
self.layoutBlock ? self.layoutBlock(layer) : nil;
}
#end
This illustrates setting the block property via the accessor (albeit inside init, a debatably dicey practice..) vs the first example's "nonatomic" "getter" mechanism. In either case… the "hardcoded" implementations can always be overwritten, per instance.. a lá..
CALayoutDelegator *littleHelper = CALayoutDelegator.new;
littleHelper.layoutBlock = ^(CALayer*layer){
[layer.sublayers do:^(id sub){ [sub somethingElseEntirely]; }];
};
someLayer.layoutManager = littleHelper;
Also.. if you want to add a block property in a category... say you want to use a Block instead of some old-school target / action "action"... You can just use associated values to, well.. associate the blocks.
typedef void(^NSControlActionBlock)(NSControl*);
#interface NSControl (ActionBlocks)
#property (copy) NSControlActionBlock actionBlock; #end
#implementation NSControl (ActionBlocks)
- (NSControlActionBlock) actionBlock {
// use the "getter" method's selector to store/retrieve the block!
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, _cmd);
}
- (void) setActionBlock:(NSControlActionBlock)ab {
objc_setAssociatedObject( // save (copy) the block associatively, as categories can't synthesize Ivars.
self, #selector(actionBlock),ab ,OBJC_ASSOCIATION_COPY);
self.target = self; // set self as target (where you call the block)
self.action = #selector(doItYourself); // this is where it's called.
}
- (void) doItYourself {
if (self.actionBlock && self.target == self) self.actionBlock(self);
}
#end
Now, when you make a button, you don't have to set up some IBAction drama.. Just associate the work to be done at creation...
_button.actionBlock = ^(NSControl*thisButton){
[doc open]; [thisButton setEnabled:NO];
};
This pattern can be applied OVER and OVER to Cocoa API's. Use properties to bring the relevant parts of your code closer together, eliminate convoluted delegation paradigms, and leverage the power of objects beyond that of just acting as dumb "containers".

Answer 5

Of course you could use blocks as properties. But make sure they are declared as #property(copy). For example:
typedef void(^TestBlock)(void);
#interface SecondViewController : UIViewController
#property (nonatomic, copy) TestBlock block;
#end
In MRC, blocks capturing context variables are allocated in stack; they will be released when the stack frame is destroyed. If they are copied, a new block will be allocated in heap, which can be executed later on after the stack frame is poped.

Answer 6

Disclamer
This is not intended to be "the good answer", as this question ask explicitly for ObjectiveC. As Apple introduced Swift at the WWDC14, I'd like to share the different ways to use block (or closures) in Swift.
Hello, Swift
You have many ways offered to pass a block equivalent to function in Swift.
I found three.
To understand this I suggest you to test in playground this little piece of code.
func test(function:String -> String) -> String
{
return function("test")
}
func funcStyle(s:String) -> String
{
return "FUNC__" + s + "__FUNC"
}
let resultFunc = test(funcStyle)
let blockStyle:(String) -> String = {s in return "BLOCK__" + s + "__BLOCK"}
let resultBlock = test(blockStyle)
let resultAnon = test({(s:String) -> String in return "ANON_" + s + "__ANON" })
println(resultFunc)
println(resultBlock)
println(resultAnon)
Swift, optimized for closures
As Swift is optimized for asynchronous development, Apple worked more on closures.
The first is that function signature can be inferred so you don't have to rewrite it.
Access params by numbers
let resultShortAnon = test({return "ANON_" + $0 + "__ANON" })
Params inference with naming
let resultShortAnon2 = test({myParam in return "ANON_" + myParam + "__ANON" })
Trailing Closure
This special case works only if the block is the last argument, it's called trailing closure
Here is an example (merged with inferred signature to show Swift power)
let resultTrailingClosure = test { return "TRAILCLOS_" + $0 + "__TRAILCLOS" }
Finally:
Using all this power what I'd do is mixing trailing closure and type inference (with naming for readability)
PFFacebookUtils.logInWithPermissions(permissions) {
user, error in
if (!user) {
println("Uh oh. The user cancelled the Facebook login.")
} else if (user.isNew) {
println("User signed up and logged in through Facebook!")
} else {
println("User logged in through Facebook!")
}
}

Answer 7

Hello, Swift
Complementing what #Francescu answered.
Adding extra parameters:
func test(function:String -> String, param1:String, param2:String) -> String
{
return function("test"+param1 + param2)
}
func funcStyle(s:String) -> String
{
return "FUNC__" + s + "__FUNC"
}
let resultFunc = test(funcStyle, "parameter 1", "parameter 2")
let blockStyle:(String) -> String = {s in return "BLOCK__" + s + "__BLOCK"}
let resultBlock = test(blockStyle, "parameter 1", "parameter 2")
let resultAnon = test({(s:String) -> String in return "ANON_" + s + "__ANON" }, "parameter 1", "parameter 2")
println(resultFunc)
println(resultBlock)
println(resultAnon)

Answer 8

You can follow the format below and can use the testingObjectiveCBlock property in the class.
typedef void (^testingObjectiveCBlock)(NSString *errorMsg);
#interface MyClass : NSObject
#property (nonatomic, strong) testingObjectiveCBlock testingObjectiveCBlock;
#end
For more info have a look here