Re: Opposite of delegate?
Re: Opposite of delegate?
- Subject: Re: Opposite of delegate?
- From: Matt Ridley <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 02:13:58 +0100
On Saturday, May 12, 2001, at 02:05 am, Ali Ozer wrote:
Note that delegate methods always get the original object as an
argument, so at least within those methods you have a handle to
the object you want.
Hi Ali,
Thanks for your reply. Perhaps you can help me with the
underlying problem which caused me to ask about getting the
'opposite of a delegate'.
I've recently added a drawer to my application's window, and
have created a drawer delegate class to deal with various
things. In Interface Builder, I found that I could not specify
the content size of the drawer (the fields in the inspector were
disabled, and set to 200x200). Not even after connecting a
content view for the drawer were they available.
Thus, I had to set the content size of the drawer in code, and
the appropriate way to do it seemed to be to add an awakeFromNib
implementation to my drawer's delegate class. Of course,
awakeFromNib doesn't have access to the drawer directly, hence
my question (and hence my current solution of defining an outlet
for the drawer).
This would all be unnecessary if I could work out why my drawer
refuses to adopt the content size of its content view. It
defaults to 200x200, which causes my app's window to jump to
that size whenever the user tries to resize it.
If anyone has any thoughts on this, I'd appreciate hearing them.
Drawers in Interface Builder are puzzling me quite a bit
(particularly the way they handle the Size attributes in their
content view - things seem to jump around a lot).
Best,
-Matt
--
Matt Ridley
<
http://www.mattridley.com/>