• 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: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ???
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ???


  • Subject: Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ???
  • From: Izidor Jerebic <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 10:07:09 +0100


On Jan 4, 2005, at 9:29 AM, Izidor Jerebic wrote:


On Jan 4, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Charlton Wilbur wrote:


If I want to make this object KVC/KVO compliant, there is substantial work to be done. And not because the object is badly designed. I can change its implementation any time. This means its design is OK. KVC/KVO is influencing its implementation, not design.

KVC says, roughly, that if you try to read a key called "foo" that it looks (in some order) for an instance variable called foo or _foo or a method called foo. In your example, you might have a reason not to store the value -- that's fine. You can make it KVC compliant by providing a method that takes no arguments, with its name the same as they key you are using. If you only want to be able to read one value from it, that's one method that you need to implement -- hardly "substantial work."



One additional important point that I forgot in my previous email: this is the Model we are changing, and the reason for changes is the View. So we are putting the view-related stuff into the model. This bothers me a lot.


If your model is already KVC/KVO like (with getters/setters), bindings are a great way to put your model into view. If not, there is a question: how much additional view-related stuff you can tolerate in the model and how much work the bindings do for you. It's up to you to calculate (heh) the costs/benefits.

EOF did not have these problems, because in EOF there was a way of having all your logic in a category (separate file), using the accessors. But with EOF the design usually started with the relational scheme, and object classes were generated from it. Just the reverse of OO design, where you specify goals, and then proceed from goals (external interface) to internal implementation.

I must say this discussion is really fruitful (to me, YMMV :-).


izidor

_______________________________________________
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


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ???
      • From: mmalcolm crawford <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: Izidor Jerebic <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: Tim Lucas <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: Izidor Jerebic <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: mmalcolm crawford <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: Izidor Jerebic <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: mmalcolm crawford <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: Izidor Jerebic <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: Charlton Wilbur <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ??? (From: Izidor Jerebic <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ???
  • Next by Date: Re: [Q]How can I bring the information of the file that I select from desktop to a program that I intend to make?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ???
  • Next by thread: Re: Cocoa Bindings - nondebuggable, non-obvious, procedural ???
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread