macOS setIntValue equivalent for NSNumber?

[liptonlover]

in the following line,

[userObject performSelector:userSelector withObject:returnValue];

I need to pass an int. But it only accepts an object. So I decided to use an NSNumber instance. Just before calling the above method, I want to put the value of my int into my NSNumber instance. But looking through the class methods, there is no setInt: method or anything like it. I looked through NSValue as well but nothing there either. How do I do it?
Nate

 

[robbieduncan]

NSNumber is not a mutable class so there are no setXXX methods. Look at the documentation more carefully and you will see both a numberWithInt: convenience constructor and a initWithInt: initialiser suitable for creating a NSNumber with a specific int value.

 

[liptonlover]

but can I init/create it multiple times, or will I have to destroy it and remake it repeatedly? It's not a static number, it will be changing rapidly over and over again.

 

[lee1210]

in the following line,

[userObject performSelector:userSelector withObject:returnValue];

I need to pass an int. But it only accepts an object. So I decided to use an NSNumber instance. Just before calling the above method, I want to put the value of my int into my NSNumber instance. But looking through the class methods, there is no setInt: method or anything like it. I looked through NSValue as well but nothing there either. How do I do it?
Nate

C'mon! In the last thread I gave you a reasonably good blueprint for passing 4 values via an Object designed just for that purpose. With this method you can only pass two parameters using performSelector:withObject:withObject. Even if you only need 2 now, you'd have to change quite a bit if you needed a third option in the future, whereas if you use an "argument" class, if you need to extend what you are passing you just need to add a field to the class, then set it in your caller and deal with it in your receiver.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/555365/

It's worth knowing how to use NSNumber, but I think it would be better to plan for the worst (needing to pass 200 arguments) and have a design that will readily support that, vs. hoping that you never need to improve/extend the functions in question and only allowing up to 2 arguments with your current design.

-Lee

 

[robbieduncan]

but can I init/create it multiple times, or will I have to destroy it and remake it repeatedly? It's not a static number, it will be changing rapidly over and over again.

If you use NSNumber you have to create/destroy it over and over: NSNumber is immutable: it cannot be changed once created. Note that there is no NSMutableNumber class.

If you are really that worried about the overhead of creating lots of NSNumbers instead of re-using one then create your own MyInt class that has a single property intValue that you can change...

 

[liptonlover]

lee your suggestions were fine, but that's over complicating the situation. I found that I only need to pass one variable. I will certainly keep your post saved on my computer in case I need it, but right now I don't.

Just in case anyone's interested... here's the working code. The animation works almost perfectly, though I have one bug to fix.

[returnValue release];
returnValue=nil;
returnValue=[[NSNumber alloc] initWithInt:animateInt];
[userObject performSelector:userSelector withObject:returnValue];

- (void)draw:(NSNumber *)returnValue {
	NSLog(@"draw invoked");
	[field setObjectValue:returnValue];
}

Nate

 

[caveman_uk]

unless you release returnValue somewhere you've got a memory leak to fix as well. An autoreleased object doesn't need releasing.

 

[TheNiggler]

unless you release returnValue somewhere you've got a memory leak to fix as well. An autoreleased object doesn't need releasing.

[B][returnValue release];[/B]
returnValue=nil;
returnValue=[[NSNumber alloc] initWithInt:animateInt];
[userObject performSelector:userSelector withObject:returnValue];

Nate

Learn to read.

 

[robbieduncan]

Learn to read.

The release statement is before the alloc/init pair hence the message is being sent to a different object. Therefore caveman_uk is 100% correct. If you are going to resurrect long dead threads to be borderline rude to people please at least try and be correct.