• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
RE: Convenience Methods
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Convenience Methods


  • Subject: RE: Convenience Methods
  • From: Jeff Laing <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 09:37:48 +1000

> Sometimes when I'm writing convenience constructors I might write
>
>    + (MyClass *)myClassWithFoo:(int)f
>    {
>       return [[[self alloc] initWithFoo:f] autorelease];
>    }
>
> where "self" is, of course, the class.  A good reason to do that is
> that it means that a subclass only has to override -initWithFoo: in
> order to make +myClassWithFoo: work as expected.

I'm still undecided on whether this is a good thing or not.  I'm going to go
one level more specific.

@class Animal
+ (Animal*)animalWithName:(NSString*)n	{ ... }
- (Animal*)initWithName:(NSString*)n	{ ... }
@end

@class Dog(Animal)
@end

Now, in this case, you can call

Dog *pet = [Dog animalWithName:@"Rover"];

but that feel uncomfortable to me.  I'd still be inclined to add another
method so I could write:

Dog *pet = [Dog dogWithName:@"Rover"];

even if all it did was wrap up the same methods.  ie,

+ (Dog*)dogWithName:(NSString*)n
{
    return [[[[self class] alloc] initWithName:n] autorelease];
}

Its clearly a subjective issue, a comfort thing.  At the very least, it
gives me somewhere different to put a breakpoint when it all goes "to the
dogs", so to speak.
_______________________________________________

Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)

Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com

Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Convenience Methods
      • From: Uli Kusterer <email@hidden>
    • Re: Convenience Methods
      • From: Wade Tregaskis <email@hidden>
  • Prev by Date: RE: Convenience Methods
  • Next by Date: RE: Convenience Methods
  • Previous by thread: RE: Convenience Methods
  • Next by thread: Re: Convenience Methods
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread