On 22 May 2015, at 6:03 am, Jonathan Taylor <jonathan.tay...@glasgow.ac.uk>
wrote:
> I agree that it’s extra indirection, but since performance is never going to
> be an issue, I feel it’s a slight gain on tidiness and maintainability. I
> agree that it’s not a big deal for one property, but when there are lots it
> starts to add up.
How about cooking up a macro for defining the accessors?
#define DECLARE_PROPERTY(PROPERTY,TYPE) \
@property (nonatomic, copy) TYPE PROPERTY;
#define DEFINE_PROPERTY(PROPERTY,TYPE) \
- (TYPE)PROPERTY \
{ \
return _##PROPERTY; \
} \
\
- (void)set##PROPERTY:(TYPE)x \
{ \
_##PROPERTY = x; \
[self setNeedsDisplay]; \
} \
...
@interface Foo
DECLARE_PROPERTY(widgetName, NSString *);
@end
...
@implmenetation Foo
DEFINE_PROPERTY(widgetName, NSString *);
@end
> And it’s not just the setters - what finally spurred me into action was the
> decision that I wanted all my properties to be atomic (which may or may not
> be related to an occasional crash I have been seeing). That means writing a
> correct threadsafe getter for each one as well...
Since you're talking about properties on an NSView subclass, and NSView is
documented as being not thread-safe, the atomicity thing sounds like a big red
herring (or red flag, depending on your preference for fish or cloth).
b
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
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:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
