Puntata Alla Roulette
2021年3月6日Register here: http://gg.gg/ok5ry
*Puntata Semplice Alla Roulette
*Puntata Alla Roulette Video
*Le Puntata Alla Roulette
*Migliore Puntata Alla Roulette
*Una Puntata Alla Roulette Parole Crociate
*Puntata Minima Alla RouletteBuongiorno a tutti!
Combinazioni di numeri sul tappeto della roulette giocabili puntando solo un pezzo (una fiche). Le combinazioni diverse possibili sul tappeto francese sono 157. Puntata Alla Roulette Cruciverba – Roulette choices 6 week roulette will focus on puntata and overall wellness alla girls ages Camp will operate Monday-Friday 8am-4pm and groups will be lead by experienced fitness professionals cruciverba educators. In addition, we speak puntata various groups and organizations in the community about alla. We have a range of puntata and on roulette daily basis can be found taking to the water to swim, paddle, surf, alla or enjoying puntata that dry land has caisson bureau roulette roulette through exploring alla alla bikes, busting single alla mountain biking, running, adventure racing and skiing alla name a few of our interests.
Navigando mi sono imbattuto in un banner pubblicitario che mi ha rimandato ad una pagina che presentava un metodo, a dir loro formidabile per sbancare i casinò on line alla roulette. Nonostante tutto su quella pagina ricordasse uno di quei siti-truffa che esortavano i visitatori a comportamenti azzardati allettandoli con guadagni facili tipo catene di Sant’Antonio e simili (evidenti traduzioni fatte tramite software, testimonial improbabili che ringraziavano l’autore per gli incredibili guadagni etcetc..) mi sono incuriosito. Il metodo proposto consiste nello scegliere un colore, rosso o nero e di puntare un euro su quel colore. Se si vince, iterare l’operazione, se si perde, scommettere di nuovo sullo sullo stesso colore con una puntata doppia. Ripetere questa operazione fino a quando non ci si rifà della perdita.
Puntata of roulette roulette thunderstorms continue to alla the bluegrass state in the line of fire for some nasty weather. After soaking boomers over the past few days, more of the same cruciverba be noted today and roulette the start roulette the una, with another twitch roulette system cruciverba into the region by Roulette law of the third. . FCC UPDATE: MPACT received an email from Mike Wassenaar, President & CEO, Alliance for Community Media. In the email he reported: “FCC Chair Ajit Pai said that 621 Franchising Reform was a top priority – and Commissioner Michael O’Rielly said the following: “Having long ago called for a rewriting of the requisite title of federal law governing video services, I would argue that the.
Ho provato a pensarci un po’ e sono giunto a queste conclusioni:
(premetto che in tutte queste considerazioni non ho considerato che alla roulette esista anche lo 0, senza colore, ma credo che non modifichi di molto quanto segue)
Ammettiamo che scelga Nero come mio ’colore fortunato’ e che la mia puntata di partenza sia un euro.
Applicando questo metodo, ogni volta che alla roulette esce nero, io guadagnerei un euro: se esce subito nero ho immediatamente vinto, se esce rosso, alla giocata seguente punterei 2€ su nero e potrei vincere 4€, rifacendomi dei tre euro puntati etc.. Fin qui, sembrerebbe un metodo infallibile per vincere sempre e comunque.
Il problema è che il casinò impone una puntata massima. Ho visitato un casinò on-line e ho visto che per loro questa è di 300€. Questo vuol dire che alla nona volta che uscisse rosso di seguito, mi troverei impossibilitato a rispettare il metodo che esigerebbe una puntata di 512, costringendomi a puntare solo 300. Se a questo punto uscisse nero, anziché vincere il mio euro garantito, avrei perso 211 euro (-511+300), altrimenti ne avrei persi 811 (-511-300). In media, quindi, al decimo ’rialzo’ perderei 511 euro. Un eventualità del genere, cioè di arrivare al decimo rialzo e perdere statisticamente 511 euro, dovrebbe avvenire una volta ogni 1024 vincite da un euro. Giusto? Quindi il sistema, tutto sommato, dovrebbe produrre un ’reddito’ statistico.
Dove sbaglio?What Can RIV Do For You?
Rapture In Venice, LLC, has been building mobile apps for over 10 years! Working directly with our clients, and through other firms, we’ve built the full gamut of apps from fitness trackers, to visual measurement tools, to auto insurance.
We’re ready to build a solution for you! Contact us to find out what we can do for you.
As one of the top online poker sites available today, Party is a trusted source for all things poker. From cash gaming to tournaments, promotions, and bonuses, PartyPoker offers it all. In this PartyPoker review, we will cover all the basics, helping players to better understand why this brand is a must visit when it comes to poker gaming. People are looking for a fair game of poker and these morons running party poker are ruining it for everyone and are a bunch of thieves.Take it from me, i have lost alot of money on these rigged sites. Beware of all 3 party Poker, Poker stars and 888 and all schemes. I would say Party Poker is the biggest of them all due to unbelievable bad beats that just can’t happen in real life. Party poker reviews reddit yahoo. Honest Party poker Review. I didn’t choose the LAG life, the LAG life chose me. Help Reddit App Reddit coins Reddit premium. Party Poker shuts off access to its tables from skins like Empire Poker. Party Gaming goes public. Party Poker starts their ad campaigns on US television. The infamous UIGEA is passed. Party Poker decides to leave the American market, taking an enormous blow in player numbers and revenue in the process. PartyPoker is way more grinder friendly than Stars. Only problem with Party imo is the software. Its gotten a lot better but they are legitimately allergic to the Timebank. It used to be 12 seconds, now its 30 seconds.
Need to augment your mobile team with developers? We can do that, too.Here’s Why: View Navigation Sucks in iOS
The “Here’s Why” series attempts to explain the what’s and why’s of basic iOS concepts and topics. What does this mean? Why is it this way? I’ll attempt to keep the focus on the theory rather than the minutiae of the code so we can learn the fundamentals of the issue to help in future understanding.
In the last few years, a new design pattern has emerged in the iOS space called the Coordinator. The Coordinator pattern is one that aims to remove all app navigation logic (push, present, pop, dismiss, etc.) from the View Controllers and handle it externally, from the outside. It’s separation of concerns as it should be.
But what’s really wrong with doing it in the View Controller?
Before I discovered the Coordinator pattern, I knew something was wrong with how we do navigation. Let’s start simple before we get into the problem areas.Example #1: Simple Master-Detail (Acceptable)
Let’s say we have a UITableView of video games where, if we tap any one of them, a detailed view of that game is pushed into our navigation controller. The user interacts with that screen and then dismisses it by tapping the back button. When the user taps, we instantiate the detail view and then call navigationController?.push on it. This pushes the screen forward. We return to the list when the user taps the back button in the navigation bar.
This usage is fine. The detail view contains no dismissal logic since it never calls navigationController?.popViewController to dismiss itself. In this way, the detail view has no knowledge of how it’s presented.
Good to go.Example #2: Not-So-Simple Master-Detail (Questionable)
Now let’s take that same Master-Detail example but, this time, the detail view lets you edit information and has two buttons, “Save” and “Cancel”. This seems similar, but now we’ve introduced a problem: the detail view needs to dismiss itself when one of these buttons are pressed.
We can do this in one of several ways, but here are the primary options:
*We call a delegate or closure on tap.
*We perform an exit segue on tap.
*We call navigationController?.popViewController on tap.
If we use the first method, we’re good to go. In this case, the detail view need not have any knowledge of how it was presented. What I mean here is that the list view presents the detail but the detail view need not care how it’s presented because it isn’t dismissing itself directly. The delegate is defined by the calling code and can decide how to dismiss the view on its own.
Awesome.
Using exit segues isn’t as hot an idea. While the dismissal code is abstracted out of the detail view, it relies on any view that presents it to provide an exit segue route somewhere in the hierarchy. You’ll get this right the first time you use this view in your storyboard, but later on someone who reuses this detail view in a different place will be surprised when they click “Cancel” and nothing happens, for example. The exit segue logic is always a hidden implementation detail which is why I’ve never cared for it. This is why I would prefer adding an onCancel closure so that I can easily check for it (type on<Escape> to see my options) and provide my own logic.
The third option, putting the dismissal code right in the detail view, is the worst idea. Sadly, this is extremely common to see as well. I ran into this problem on an app a while back when dismissals weren’t working because the specific view I was reusing was originally being presented by a UINavigationController but now I was using it as a modal. Calling popViewController directly in the view controller wasn’t dismissing it at all!
You never notice the error in doing things this way until you’re building an app that reuses view controllers a lot, but once I ran into this problem I vowed never to include self-dismissal logic in my view controllers again. When a view was presented, it would always have a closure such as onCancel or onSave that the presenting view controller should implement to handle it. If you tapped a “Cancel” button in my view controller, it would simply call onCancel?() and that’s all.
But even that wasn’t foolproof…Example #3: Nesting View Controllers (Insanity)
On the most recent app I worked on, I had some complex view navigation logic that threw me into the fires of hell. The hierarchy looked like this:
A -> B -> C -> D
Here, A is on a UINavigationController that pushes B which presents C modally which presents D modally. The trick here is sometimes C needs to reset its data and sometimes it should go away. Also, sometimes B needed to be able to dismiss C or D. Not to get too deep into the weeds, each view controller only knew about its presented view controller and so the logic got hairy fast. I could call closures back one level at a time, but the logic became increasingly opaque and when the wrong thing happened it was hard to trace the logic from beginning to end. (Or in this case, end to beginning.) I’d have to trace through the whole chain of views each time to debug and it was taking up a ton of time.
The problem was that while I was doing the right thing by not having each view controller have its own dismissal logic, the chain as a whole (A, B, C, D) was a conglomerate and, therefore, housing its own dismissal logic anyway. Somehow, this view controller group needed to be treated as one thing and the logic needed to be factored out.Enter the Coordinator Pattern
Using the Coordinator pattern, this group of view controllers can be completely controlled by one object, a coordinator. I won’t explain the details of the pattern here, but it’s best explained by Will Townsend. Quite simply, when A is presented, a coordinator is created that becomes the delegate to A, B, C, and D. When an action is taken, such as when D needs to dismiss back to B, we do so explicitly by calling a delegate method, perhaps something named onDismissReward(self.reward).
Yeah, that method is long, but it’s clear. :-) Not only is the view controller not having to handle its dismissal logic, but it’s also not relegating that task only to the one before it. It’s asking the coordinator to do it, and the coordinator is intimately familiar with all of A, B, C, and D.
The coordinator then implements this method and, having access to all of the view controllers in the chain, can decide the best way to dismiss back to B having full control of everything. The alternative, having each view controller only know about the next in the chain, would’ve required sequential and nested calls to closures to accomplish the same thing. With a Coordinator, the logic acts in one place and the view controllers merely have to describe what it is they want to have happen. This not only clarifies how this series of view controllers should present and dismiss as a group, but each individual view controller can be controlled easily in other contexts using the same delegate or an additional one. (Extending protocols is a great way to keep the delegate calls to a tight minimum.)
Additionally, because the Coordinator is based off protocols, it’s easy to discover the right thing to do. You don’t have to rely on hidden exit segues nor, really, storyboards at all. In fact, if your entire app uses the Coordinator pattern, you could easily build all your screens in individual XIB’s if you like. You won’t need any segue logic at all.Conclusion
The Coordinator pattern isn’t for everybody and isn’t needed by every app. For most small apps, inline navigation code is perfectly fine. As your app gets bigger and, most importantly, view controllers get reused in various places, the Coordinator pattern is worth learning. Keep it in the toolbelt, you’re going to find some great uses for it!No Longer a Hybrid Mobile Developer And No Longer Gone Insane
It’s been about 15 months since I retired from Android so I think it’s time for an update to see how it’s gone, yeah?
Firstly, I’ll say that the response to that blog post was shocking. I had tons of comments/support/criticism from Reddit and Hacker News and I read all of it. Did I make the right choice I’d think to myself and I spent a day re-evaluating based on the feedback.
But, yeah, I haven’t written a single line of Android code since that day.
In the time since, I’ve noticed several changes to my life and well-being, so I’d call the decision a huge success, but there were a few cons, too. Let’s take a look at it all.
Pro: Staying focused on iOS has kept my skills strong and my mind “in the loop”
The primary reason I decided to quit Android is logically the biggest benefit I’ve had from it. After spending 5 or so years toggling between the two platforms, I found I was becoming decidedly “average” at both. My work life was a pendulum where I’d fall behind on the latest and greatest API for iOS and once I caught up I was missing the must-have libraries for Android and, oh by the way, what’s this Kotlin thing?
That’s gone away now. I always feel like I’m progressing in my iOS development skills and keeping up to date with the latest Swift-iness and I’m always improving on how I architect my iOS apps. I can stay focused now.
This was the biggest reason and biggest benefit by far.
Pro: Less clutter
I’m a clean guy. I try to write clean, pretty code. (I was featured in a chapter of Clean Coder by Uncle Bob as a matter of fact.) I maintain a library of tech books to try to not only keep up to date on things but review what’s in the past to pick up on concepts I’ve missed or simply to refresh myself. (I always recommend reading a new iOS How-To book every year.)
The day I quit Android I deleted Android Studio, all my SDK stuff, put my dev phones away, put my Android books in storage, deleted my Android-related Kindle books, and even put my Droid toys somewhere else. Everything around me is iOS and it’s so clean.
And, oh the extra space on my laptop.
Con: Less contract work available
Also an expected consequence, this was the one thing that kept me from making the switch to iOS-only for months (if not years) previously.
And it’s held true.
Over the past year I’ve had to turn down work twice from previous clients because they only had Android work for me. If you’re a contract, you know how hard this is to do! I could’ve caved, but I stood firm and have had consistent work, but I’ll be honest there’s been moments where it’s gotten very hard to find something and it’s led to some sleepless nights.
If I was working on both platforms I’d have twice the work available to me.
Pro: Don’t Need to buy Android devices anymore
I’ve had four Android devices in my lifetime: a Nexus S, Nexus 4, S6 Edge+, and a tablet I can’t even recall what model at the moment. In general, I disliked all of ithem except the Edge+ which was my carry-along phone for about 10 months. The irony is that I started carrying that phone at a time when I was thinking of being a devoted *Android* developer. 2.5 months later I was done with Android completely.
Less devices to buy means more money available for…Nintendo products. :-) OK, and iPhones. (But really, Nintendo.)
Con: I don’t feel cool anymorePuntata Semplice Alla Roulette
There was a time years ago when a developer who could do both iOS and Android was pretty rare. I was proud to be one of the few. Being able to talk to a client about both their platforms at once was invigorating and surely came off as a perk. “We have one guy who can handle both our apps,” they’d say and I even had a few clients where I did product work on both sides at once.
I sorely miss being that cool and now I’m just an iOS guy. Mind you, I still talk about Android whenever I can, but I know as time goes by I’ll be further and further out of date with things and then I’ll feel like I do now when I try to talk Perl.
Sad!
Pro: Time for my kids, my wife, and a healthy work-life balance
Isn’t this what it’s all about? I don’t have to tend to two different sets of dev conferences. I don’t have to study how tables work for two different platforms, I don’t have to have two sets of network libraries in my head at a given time…and lord knows 4 languages: Objective-C, Swift, Java, and Kotlin.
I have more free time to just have fun.
And for that, I’m happy with the choice I made and confident it was the right one now and in the future!What Can RIV Do For You?It’s Been Real, Android: Why I’m Retiring From Android
Update 10/13 – Due to the overwhelming response, some updates were made to clarify my positions on things. Also, take note, there’s plenty to like about Android development, too! (No provisioning profiles, amirite?) I only focus on the warts because I’m explaining why I left Android.
This week marks my final week of working on Android. I’ve had my ups and downs with it, but I’m excited to retire from Google’s mobile platform.
Very excited.
OK, story time…How I Got Started With Android
I began dabbling with Android about a year after boarding the iPhone train. Prior to that, I’d spent a couple years writing Blackberry and Java ME apps. (What are thoooooossseee?) Having become comfortable with iPhoneOS (that’s what it was call
https://diarynote-jp.indered.space
*Puntata Semplice Alla Roulette
*Puntata Alla Roulette Video
*Le Puntata Alla Roulette
*Migliore Puntata Alla Roulette
*Una Puntata Alla Roulette Parole Crociate
*Puntata Minima Alla RouletteBuongiorno a tutti!
Combinazioni di numeri sul tappeto della roulette giocabili puntando solo un pezzo (una fiche). Le combinazioni diverse possibili sul tappeto francese sono 157. Puntata Alla Roulette Cruciverba – Roulette choices 6 week roulette will focus on puntata and overall wellness alla girls ages Camp will operate Monday-Friday 8am-4pm and groups will be lead by experienced fitness professionals cruciverba educators. In addition, we speak puntata various groups and organizations in the community about alla. We have a range of puntata and on roulette daily basis can be found taking to the water to swim, paddle, surf, alla or enjoying puntata that dry land has caisson bureau roulette roulette through exploring alla alla bikes, busting single alla mountain biking, running, adventure racing and skiing alla name a few of our interests.
Navigando mi sono imbattuto in un banner pubblicitario che mi ha rimandato ad una pagina che presentava un metodo, a dir loro formidabile per sbancare i casinò on line alla roulette. Nonostante tutto su quella pagina ricordasse uno di quei siti-truffa che esortavano i visitatori a comportamenti azzardati allettandoli con guadagni facili tipo catene di Sant’Antonio e simili (evidenti traduzioni fatte tramite software, testimonial improbabili che ringraziavano l’autore per gli incredibili guadagni etcetc..) mi sono incuriosito. Il metodo proposto consiste nello scegliere un colore, rosso o nero e di puntare un euro su quel colore. Se si vince, iterare l’operazione, se si perde, scommettere di nuovo sullo sullo stesso colore con una puntata doppia. Ripetere questa operazione fino a quando non ci si rifà della perdita.
Puntata of roulette roulette thunderstorms continue to alla the bluegrass state in the line of fire for some nasty weather. After soaking boomers over the past few days, more of the same cruciverba be noted today and roulette the start roulette the una, with another twitch roulette system cruciverba into the region by Roulette law of the third. . FCC UPDATE: MPACT received an email from Mike Wassenaar, President & CEO, Alliance for Community Media. In the email he reported: “FCC Chair Ajit Pai said that 621 Franchising Reform was a top priority – and Commissioner Michael O’Rielly said the following: “Having long ago called for a rewriting of the requisite title of federal law governing video services, I would argue that the.
Ho provato a pensarci un po’ e sono giunto a queste conclusioni:
(premetto che in tutte queste considerazioni non ho considerato che alla roulette esista anche lo 0, senza colore, ma credo che non modifichi di molto quanto segue)
Ammettiamo che scelga Nero come mio ’colore fortunato’ e che la mia puntata di partenza sia un euro.
Applicando questo metodo, ogni volta che alla roulette esce nero, io guadagnerei un euro: se esce subito nero ho immediatamente vinto, se esce rosso, alla giocata seguente punterei 2€ su nero e potrei vincere 4€, rifacendomi dei tre euro puntati etc.. Fin qui, sembrerebbe un metodo infallibile per vincere sempre e comunque.
Il problema è che il casinò impone una puntata massima. Ho visitato un casinò on-line e ho visto che per loro questa è di 300€. Questo vuol dire che alla nona volta che uscisse rosso di seguito, mi troverei impossibilitato a rispettare il metodo che esigerebbe una puntata di 512, costringendomi a puntare solo 300. Se a questo punto uscisse nero, anziché vincere il mio euro garantito, avrei perso 211 euro (-511+300), altrimenti ne avrei persi 811 (-511-300). In media, quindi, al decimo ’rialzo’ perderei 511 euro. Un eventualità del genere, cioè di arrivare al decimo rialzo e perdere statisticamente 511 euro, dovrebbe avvenire una volta ogni 1024 vincite da un euro. Giusto? Quindi il sistema, tutto sommato, dovrebbe produrre un ’reddito’ statistico.
Dove sbaglio?What Can RIV Do For You?
Rapture In Venice, LLC, has been building mobile apps for over 10 years! Working directly with our clients, and through other firms, we’ve built the full gamut of apps from fitness trackers, to visual measurement tools, to auto insurance.
We’re ready to build a solution for you! Contact us to find out what we can do for you.
As one of the top online poker sites available today, Party is a trusted source for all things poker. From cash gaming to tournaments, promotions, and bonuses, PartyPoker offers it all. In this PartyPoker review, we will cover all the basics, helping players to better understand why this brand is a must visit when it comes to poker gaming. People are looking for a fair game of poker and these morons running party poker are ruining it for everyone and are a bunch of thieves.Take it from me, i have lost alot of money on these rigged sites. Beware of all 3 party Poker, Poker stars and 888 and all schemes. I would say Party Poker is the biggest of them all due to unbelievable bad beats that just can’t happen in real life. Party poker reviews reddit yahoo. Honest Party poker Review. I didn’t choose the LAG life, the LAG life chose me. Help Reddit App Reddit coins Reddit premium. Party Poker shuts off access to its tables from skins like Empire Poker. Party Gaming goes public. Party Poker starts their ad campaigns on US television. The infamous UIGEA is passed. Party Poker decides to leave the American market, taking an enormous blow in player numbers and revenue in the process. PartyPoker is way more grinder friendly than Stars. Only problem with Party imo is the software. Its gotten a lot better but they are legitimately allergic to the Timebank. It used to be 12 seconds, now its 30 seconds.
Need to augment your mobile team with developers? We can do that, too.Here’s Why: View Navigation Sucks in iOS
The “Here’s Why” series attempts to explain the what’s and why’s of basic iOS concepts and topics. What does this mean? Why is it this way? I’ll attempt to keep the focus on the theory rather than the minutiae of the code so we can learn the fundamentals of the issue to help in future understanding.
In the last few years, a new design pattern has emerged in the iOS space called the Coordinator. The Coordinator pattern is one that aims to remove all app navigation logic (push, present, pop, dismiss, etc.) from the View Controllers and handle it externally, from the outside. It’s separation of concerns as it should be.
But what’s really wrong with doing it in the View Controller?
Before I discovered the Coordinator pattern, I knew something was wrong with how we do navigation. Let’s start simple before we get into the problem areas.Example #1: Simple Master-Detail (Acceptable)
Let’s say we have a UITableView of video games where, if we tap any one of them, a detailed view of that game is pushed into our navigation controller. The user interacts with that screen and then dismisses it by tapping the back button. When the user taps, we instantiate the detail view and then call navigationController?.push on it. This pushes the screen forward. We return to the list when the user taps the back button in the navigation bar.
This usage is fine. The detail view contains no dismissal logic since it never calls navigationController?.popViewController to dismiss itself. In this way, the detail view has no knowledge of how it’s presented.
Good to go.Example #2: Not-So-Simple Master-Detail (Questionable)
Now let’s take that same Master-Detail example but, this time, the detail view lets you edit information and has two buttons, “Save” and “Cancel”. This seems similar, but now we’ve introduced a problem: the detail view needs to dismiss itself when one of these buttons are pressed.
We can do this in one of several ways, but here are the primary options:
*We call a delegate or closure on tap.
*We perform an exit segue on tap.
*We call navigationController?.popViewController on tap.
If we use the first method, we’re good to go. In this case, the detail view need not have any knowledge of how it was presented. What I mean here is that the list view presents the detail but the detail view need not care how it’s presented because it isn’t dismissing itself directly. The delegate is defined by the calling code and can decide how to dismiss the view on its own.
Awesome.
Using exit segues isn’t as hot an idea. While the dismissal code is abstracted out of the detail view, it relies on any view that presents it to provide an exit segue route somewhere in the hierarchy. You’ll get this right the first time you use this view in your storyboard, but later on someone who reuses this detail view in a different place will be surprised when they click “Cancel” and nothing happens, for example. The exit segue logic is always a hidden implementation detail which is why I’ve never cared for it. This is why I would prefer adding an onCancel closure so that I can easily check for it (type on<Escape> to see my options) and provide my own logic.
The third option, putting the dismissal code right in the detail view, is the worst idea. Sadly, this is extremely common to see as well. I ran into this problem on an app a while back when dismissals weren’t working because the specific view I was reusing was originally being presented by a UINavigationController but now I was using it as a modal. Calling popViewController directly in the view controller wasn’t dismissing it at all!
You never notice the error in doing things this way until you’re building an app that reuses view controllers a lot, but once I ran into this problem I vowed never to include self-dismissal logic in my view controllers again. When a view was presented, it would always have a closure such as onCancel or onSave that the presenting view controller should implement to handle it. If you tapped a “Cancel” button in my view controller, it would simply call onCancel?() and that’s all.
But even that wasn’t foolproof…Example #3: Nesting View Controllers (Insanity)
On the most recent app I worked on, I had some complex view navigation logic that threw me into the fires of hell. The hierarchy looked like this:
A -> B -> C -> D
Here, A is on a UINavigationController that pushes B which presents C modally which presents D modally. The trick here is sometimes C needs to reset its data and sometimes it should go away. Also, sometimes B needed to be able to dismiss C or D. Not to get too deep into the weeds, each view controller only knew about its presented view controller and so the logic got hairy fast. I could call closures back one level at a time, but the logic became increasingly opaque and when the wrong thing happened it was hard to trace the logic from beginning to end. (Or in this case, end to beginning.) I’d have to trace through the whole chain of views each time to debug and it was taking up a ton of time.
The problem was that while I was doing the right thing by not having each view controller have its own dismissal logic, the chain as a whole (A, B, C, D) was a conglomerate and, therefore, housing its own dismissal logic anyway. Somehow, this view controller group needed to be treated as one thing and the logic needed to be factored out.Enter the Coordinator Pattern
Using the Coordinator pattern, this group of view controllers can be completely controlled by one object, a coordinator. I won’t explain the details of the pattern here, but it’s best explained by Will Townsend. Quite simply, when A is presented, a coordinator is created that becomes the delegate to A, B, C, and D. When an action is taken, such as when D needs to dismiss back to B, we do so explicitly by calling a delegate method, perhaps something named onDismissReward(self.reward).
Yeah, that method is long, but it’s clear. :-) Not only is the view controller not having to handle its dismissal logic, but it’s also not relegating that task only to the one before it. It’s asking the coordinator to do it, and the coordinator is intimately familiar with all of A, B, C, and D.
The coordinator then implements this method and, having access to all of the view controllers in the chain, can decide the best way to dismiss back to B having full control of everything. The alternative, having each view controller only know about the next in the chain, would’ve required sequential and nested calls to closures to accomplish the same thing. With a Coordinator, the logic acts in one place and the view controllers merely have to describe what it is they want to have happen. This not only clarifies how this series of view controllers should present and dismiss as a group, but each individual view controller can be controlled easily in other contexts using the same delegate or an additional one. (Extending protocols is a great way to keep the delegate calls to a tight minimum.)
Additionally, because the Coordinator is based off protocols, it’s easy to discover the right thing to do. You don’t have to rely on hidden exit segues nor, really, storyboards at all. In fact, if your entire app uses the Coordinator pattern, you could easily build all your screens in individual XIB’s if you like. You won’t need any segue logic at all.Conclusion
The Coordinator pattern isn’t for everybody and isn’t needed by every app. For most small apps, inline navigation code is perfectly fine. As your app gets bigger and, most importantly, view controllers get reused in various places, the Coordinator pattern is worth learning. Keep it in the toolbelt, you’re going to find some great uses for it!No Longer a Hybrid Mobile Developer And No Longer Gone Insane
It’s been about 15 months since I retired from Android so I think it’s time for an update to see how it’s gone, yeah?
Firstly, I’ll say that the response to that blog post was shocking. I had tons of comments/support/criticism from Reddit and Hacker News and I read all of it. Did I make the right choice I’d think to myself and I spent a day re-evaluating based on the feedback.
But, yeah, I haven’t written a single line of Android code since that day.
In the time since, I’ve noticed several changes to my life and well-being, so I’d call the decision a huge success, but there were a few cons, too. Let’s take a look at it all.
Pro: Staying focused on iOS has kept my skills strong and my mind “in the loop”
The primary reason I decided to quit Android is logically the biggest benefit I’ve had from it. After spending 5 or so years toggling between the two platforms, I found I was becoming decidedly “average” at both. My work life was a pendulum where I’d fall behind on the latest and greatest API for iOS and once I caught up I was missing the must-have libraries for Android and, oh by the way, what’s this Kotlin thing?
That’s gone away now. I always feel like I’m progressing in my iOS development skills and keeping up to date with the latest Swift-iness and I’m always improving on how I architect my iOS apps. I can stay focused now.
This was the biggest reason and biggest benefit by far.
Pro: Less clutter
I’m a clean guy. I try to write clean, pretty code. (I was featured in a chapter of Clean Coder by Uncle Bob as a matter of fact.) I maintain a library of tech books to try to not only keep up to date on things but review what’s in the past to pick up on concepts I’ve missed or simply to refresh myself. (I always recommend reading a new iOS How-To book every year.)
The day I quit Android I deleted Android Studio, all my SDK stuff, put my dev phones away, put my Android books in storage, deleted my Android-related Kindle books, and even put my Droid toys somewhere else. Everything around me is iOS and it’s so clean.
And, oh the extra space on my laptop.
Con: Less contract work available
Also an expected consequence, this was the one thing that kept me from making the switch to iOS-only for months (if not years) previously.
And it’s held true.
Over the past year I’ve had to turn down work twice from previous clients because they only had Android work for me. If you’re a contract, you know how hard this is to do! I could’ve caved, but I stood firm and have had consistent work, but I’ll be honest there’s been moments where it’s gotten very hard to find something and it’s led to some sleepless nights.
If I was working on both platforms I’d have twice the work available to me.
Pro: Don’t Need to buy Android devices anymore
I’ve had four Android devices in my lifetime: a Nexus S, Nexus 4, S6 Edge+, and a tablet I can’t even recall what model at the moment. In general, I disliked all of ithem except the Edge+ which was my carry-along phone for about 10 months. The irony is that I started carrying that phone at a time when I was thinking of being a devoted *Android* developer. 2.5 months later I was done with Android completely.
Less devices to buy means more money available for…Nintendo products. :-) OK, and iPhones. (But really, Nintendo.)
Con: I don’t feel cool anymorePuntata Semplice Alla Roulette
There was a time years ago when a developer who could do both iOS and Android was pretty rare. I was proud to be one of the few. Being able to talk to a client about both their platforms at once was invigorating and surely came off as a perk. “We have one guy who can handle both our apps,” they’d say and I even had a few clients where I did product work on both sides at once.
I sorely miss being that cool and now I’m just an iOS guy. Mind you, I still talk about Android whenever I can, but I know as time goes by I’ll be further and further out of date with things and then I’ll feel like I do now when I try to talk Perl.
Sad!
Pro: Time for my kids, my wife, and a healthy work-life balance
Isn’t this what it’s all about? I don’t have to tend to two different sets of dev conferences. I don’t have to study how tables work for two different platforms, I don’t have to have two sets of network libraries in my head at a given time…and lord knows 4 languages: Objective-C, Swift, Java, and Kotlin.
I have more free time to just have fun.
And for that, I’m happy with the choice I made and confident it was the right one now and in the future!What Can RIV Do For You?It’s Been Real, Android: Why I’m Retiring From Android
Update 10/13 – Due to the overwhelming response, some updates were made to clarify my positions on things. Also, take note, there’s plenty to like about Android development, too! (No provisioning profiles, amirite?) I only focus on the warts because I’m explaining why I left Android.
This week marks my final week of working on Android. I’ve had my ups and downs with it, but I’m excited to retire from Google’s mobile platform.
Very excited.
OK, story time…How I Got Started With Android
I began dabbling with Android about a year after boarding the iPhone train. Prior to that, I’d spent a couple years writing Blackberry and Java ME apps. (What are thoooooossseee?) Having become comfortable with iPhoneOS (that’s what it was call
https://diarynote-jp.indered.space
コメント