Performing Restkit configuration via a class method in another class

Question

In an effort to clean up my application delegate I have moved Restkit configuration (ie, starting with [RKObjectManager managerWithBaseURL:[MYAppConfig wsBaseUrl]];) to another class MYAppConfig in a static method +(RKObjectManager *)defaultObjectManager.

At the very real risk of exposing my ignorance I am not sure whether this is a legitimate reorganization or could lead to trouble, mainly because I am not sure how Restkit's singleton is implemented (it seems like, based on the tutorials I have read, it gets created when you call the class method managerWithBaseURL).

What is driving my suspicion is that RestKit's logging functions do not seem to be firing when I make a fetch request.

The whole thing now kind of goes like this:

In MYAppDelegate.m method didFinishLaunchingWithOptions, first line:

[self _setup]

In MYAppDelegate.m method _setup

[self _setupORM];

RKLogConfigureByName("RestKit", RKLogLevelTrace);
RKLogConfigureByName("RestKit/ObjectMapping", RKLogLevelTrace);
RKLogConfigureByName("RestKit/Network", RKLogLevelTrace);
RKLogConfigureByName("RestKit/CoreData", RKLogLevelTrace);

In MYAppDelegate.m method _setupORM

RKObjectManager *manager = [MYAppConfig defaultObjectManager];
NSLog(@"Setup ORM with object manager %@",[manager description]);

In MYAppConfig.m class method defaultObjectManager

RKObjectManager *manager = [RKObjectManager managerWithBaseURL:[MYAppConfig wsBaseUrl]];

NSManagedObjectModel *managedModel = [NSManagedObjectModel mergedModelFromBundles:nil];
RKManagedObjectStore *managedStore = [[RKManagedObjectStore alloc] initWithManagedObjectModel:managedModel];

manager.managedObjectStore = managedStore;
...
[managedStore createManagedObjectContexts];

managedStore.managedObjectCache = [[RKInMemoryManagedObjectCache alloc] initWithManagedObjectContext:managedStore.persistentStoreManagedObjectContext];

return manager;

Should I look elsewhere to see why logging appears to be failing or might it have something to do with how I have structured the configuration?

Answer 1

Your intention is good and the implementation also looks correct. Your guess about the sharedManager is also correct, but only for the first instantiation (so if you were to be calling managerWithBaseURL: in 2 places and not fully configuring the first time, nothing would work - check that the original code was all removed).