"Quick Start" is not ok (?)

[7ynk3r]

I just looked carefully to the quick start example and I discovered something obvious

- (Knight*)basicKnight
{
    return [TyphoonDefinition withClass:[Knight class] configuration:^(TyphoonDefinition* definition) {
        [definition useInitializer:@selector(initWithQuest:) parameters:^(TyphoonMethod *initializer) {
            [initializer injectParameterWith:[self defaultQuest]];
        }];
    }];
}

basicKnight is not returning an instance of Knight but instead an instance of TyphoonDefinition. Why are we using that as an example? Why not simply return the correct type? Am I missing something?

Happy weekend!

[jasperblues]

It is in fact correct, though it should have clarification. We do this because:

• at build-time TyphoonAssembly methods rerun definitions - recipes for assuming an object from its config and collaborators.
• at run-time the assembly interface is used to return built components.

We used to have assembly methods return type 'is' but it worked well to have them return the type that will be produced - for IDE code completion without casting, etc. Resolving components from the assembly is where type matters the most.

This approach only works in Objective-C, in Swift the strict typing rules don't allow is kind of meta programming.

Given this is unusual we do need a clear explanation. Goals:

• get people started as quickly as possible, without overwhelming info
• at the same time don't leave them confused

It seems current quick start needs a little more of the 2nd point.

[7ynk3r]

Thanks for the clarification.

[jasperblues]

You're welcome. Sorry for the typing mistakes above:

• Rerun = return
• Exabation = explanation

;) typing on iphone (fixed now)