> On Aug 13, 2015, at 1:32 PM, André Francisco
> wrote:
>
> I only got Seth's email on the digest, not really sure why. Anyway, I copy
> pasted his response below.@Seth, thank for your answer. That's exactly what
> I've been doing all along, I didn't mention it because that's precisely what
>
a
> default parameter - too late, -init is already unavailable.
No, it's fine. Just declare the -init method as NS_DESIGNATED_INITIALIZER in
the @interface of the child class, and implement it to call -initWithParameter:
of the parent class.
--
Seth Willits
From: andre.frate...
> On Aug 12, 2015, at 8:07 PM, André Francisco
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I've been reading about object initialisation in Objective-c, as well as the
> recent additions of NS_UNAVAILABLE and NS_DESIGNATED_INITIALIZER. It's been
> confusing what the correct approach would be, mostly due to limit
I've read that too :) still, the problem sticks. I'm writing a framework, not
an app, so it's important that callers initialise objects properly. And I wish
I was using swift, honestly.
Subject: Re: Initialisation pattern
From: j...@mooseyard.com
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 20:22:36
> On Aug 12, 2015, at 8:07 PM, André Francisco
> wrote:
>
> I've been reading about object initialisation in Objective-c, as well as the
> recent additions of NS_UNAVAILABLE and NS_DESIGNATED_INITIALIZER. It's been
> confusing what the correct approach would be, mostly due to limitations
> i
