Re: NSObject Exercise comments?
Re: NSObject Exercise comments?
- Subject: Re: NSObject Exercise comments?
- From: glenn andreas <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:54:15 -0600
On Dec 12, 2005, at 1:04 PM, John Stiles wrote:
On Dec 10, 2005, at 10:39 AM, Andreas Mayer wrote:
> > -(Fraction *) reduceFraction
However, it is a good point because it leads to unnecessary
confusion.
That's actually the main point, I think. When I see a method that
returns an object, that object is usually a new one.
I know that there was a convention were the original object was
returned when ever possible, so that one could 'chain' method
calls together. But I think this is discouraged now. At least it's
uncommon and therefore confusing.
Is that so? I thought that was one of the coolest points of Cocoa,
honestly. You certainly still see it throughout Apple's classes.
About the only methods that "return self" are init (because they need
to return something - and sometimes something other than self) and
"autorelease".
Method chaining gets real confusing real quick because there's no
clear difference between something that is using it to perform a
series of operations and something that uses something that
syntactically is identical but in fact is performing different
operation on different objects.
Glenn Andreas email@hidden
<
http://www.gandreas.com/> wicked fun!
Widgetarium | the quickest path to widgets
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden