Which pattern should be used for editing properties with modal view controller on iPhone?

Question

I am looking for a good pattern for performing basic property editing via a modal view on the iPhone.

Assume I am putting together an application that works like the Contacts application. The "detail" view controller displays all of the contact's properties in a UITableView. When the UITableView goes into edit mode a disclosure icon is displayed in the cells. Clicking a cell causes a modal "editor" view controller to display a view that allows the user to modify the selected property. This view will often contain only a single text box or picker. The user clicks Cancel/Save and the "editor" view is dismissed and the "detail" view is updated.

In this scenario, which view is responsible for updating the model?

The "editor" view could update the property directly using Key-Value Coding. This appears in the CoreDataBooks example. This makes sense to me on some level because it treats the property as the model for the editor view controller.

However, this is not the pattern suggested by the View Controller Programming Guide. It suggests that the "editor" view controller should define a protocol that the "detail" controller adopts. When the user indicates they are done with the edit, the "detail" view controller is called back with the entered value and it dismisses the "editor" view. Using this approach the "detail" controller updates the model. This approach seems problematic if you are using the same "editor" view for multiple properties since there is only a single call-back method.

Would love to get some feedback on what approach works best.

Answer 1

It's a tough call--the View Controller Guide recommendation seems cleaner conceptually, but the other method can be easier, especially if you're using Core Data. To give a blanket generalized opinion, I would say use your first method if you're using Core Data, since managed objects inherently have their own context and can update themselves (and classes such as NSFetchedResultsController can automatically respond to updates).

If you're not using Core Data, I would go with the "official" recommendation, since it makes it easier to manage updated properties manually. As to the concern about multiple properties, it's certainly possible to have multiple delegate methods and call the appropriate one. For instance:

//if property is an address
if ([self.delegate respondsToSelector:@selector(editorView:didUpdateAddress:)])
    [self.delegate editorView:self didUpdateAddress:theAddress];

//if property is a name
if ([self.delegate respondsToSelector:@selector(editorView:didUpdateName:)])
    [self.delegate editorView:self didUpdateName:theName];

This could get hard to manage, though--you'd probably want to have an abstract superclass for properties, or something along those lines.

Answer 2

I don't think any of the Apple examples (or anyone else's) actually show you how to structure an entire real world application. Instead, each example is just a test harness which shows you how to use one particular feature of the API but pays no attention to how that feature really integrates with anything else. Data models are given particularly short shift.

I prefer a design in which the data model is the spine of the application upon which hands all the view-controller/view pairs. The view controllers do not communicate with each other directly but instead communicate through the data model. The data model tracks what information the app is currently working on and therefore what data each particular view controller needs at any given time.

Let's use a contact manager type apps as an example. The basic of the data model would be a list of contact objects each of which in turn would hold attributes of a contact. The data model would completely control access to the data and monitors which data was currently being used. The UI is hierarchal such that the user first sees a list of all contacts in a masterView, then the details of each contact in a contactDetailView and then can edit each contact attribute in a custom attribute edit view for each type of data so there is a nameEditView, a phoneDetailView, an emailEditView etc. Each has a paired view controller masterVC, contactDetailVC, nameEditVC etc.

The to build it's tableview, the masterVC ask the data model for the number of contacts, their divisions into sections and then request each particular contact object at each particular index path so it can display a table. When the user selects a table row, the masterVC tells the data model which contact object was selected by sending it the index. Then the masterVC pushes the contactDetailVC. It does nothing else.

When the contactDetailVC activates, it ask the data model for the currently active Contact object. It doesn't know or care how the current contact was selected nor even which view/VC preceded it. The data model returns the currently active contact. When the user selects a field, the contactDetailVC tells the data model which attribute of the contact was selected and then pushes the proper editorVC onto the stack.

When the editorVC loads it ask for the data model for the current contact and the current attribute being edited. It doesn't know or care how the current contact attribute was selected nor even which view/VC preceded it. When the user makes a change, it ask the data model to save the change (the data model can refuse if verification fails for some reason) and then pops itself.

Internally, I like to implement the data model in two parts each managed by separate object. One is the abstracted data manager itself in this case a Core Data stack. The second is an user defaults manager that tracks the actual state of operations in the data model and saves them to user defaults. A master object holds these objects as attributes and serves as the interface of the data model.

This type of model makes it easy to suspend, resume or restart the application back to its previous state. Since each view/VC is self contained, when you restart the app, you just push all the views on the stack without animation and the last one pushed pops up fully populated with data even though the user chose nothing in the previous views and indeed did not even see them.

It also protects the user from data loss in the event of a crash since each VC saves its data and the app state every time it pushes or pops. It's easy to add additional view/VC because each VC only has to know about and communicate with the data model instead of bunch of other VC. It makes the components of the app easy to use in different versions of the app or in different apps altogether.

Edit:

Do you just hard code some if statements to pair up the attributes with the correct editor, or are you doing something more dynamic based on the entity/attribute metadata?

In most the most common design, the Contact entity could have a variable number of phone#s, emails or other data fields so each attribute would actually be a separate entity and the Contact would have a relationships pointing to those entities. When the user selected that contact to edit in the ContactDetailView, the data-model would simply mark the NSManagedObject representing the desired attribute of the contact. It could do so by setting an attribute like "lastChosenAttribute" or storing the URI for the object. When the editor view loaded it would be hard coded to ask the data-model for the "lastChosenAttribute" and would receive an NSManagedObject for a phone#, email etc. The editor would make changes to that object and they would be automatically saved back into the contact.

For data that is singular, such as a name or name components, the data-model would provide the editorVC with the contact entity and the editorVC would be hard coded to ask the contact object for that specific attribute.