21

I want to add an NSMutableArray of NSStrings to one of my Entities in my core data model. The problem is that this isn't a supported type in Core Data.

I tried making a tranformable attribute, but the problem is that I see no way of turning a NSMutableArray to NSData, and then going from NSData, back to an NSMutableArray. Does anyone have an idea as to how this issue can be solved?

(I know I can archive the array, but I don't want to do that, I want it to be present in my model).

Max B.
  • 881
  • 10
  • 21
gburgoon
  • 601
  • 2
  • 5
  • 15

1 Answers1

33

You could have a binary data attribute in your modeled object, archive the array to data, and hand it off to the object.

But I think the better way would be to have a to-many relationship, instead of using an array directly.

****Edit: Here's how to archive the array into NSData so that it can be used in your managed object***

NSData *arrayData = [NSKeyedArchiver archivedDataWithRootObject:[NSArray arrayWithObjects:@"1",@"2", nil]];

Basically, any class you have which conforms to the NSCoding protocol can be archived in this way. NSArray/NSMutableArray already conform to it. They tell all of their objects to archive themselves, so they must conform too. And all of those objects' members must conform, etc. It's like a tree.

Since your array conforms, and it's an array of NSString (which also conforms), then you're golden.

Max B.
  • 881
  • 10
  • 21
jbrennan
  • 11,943
  • 14
  • 73
  • 115
  • 1
    But here we have an array of simple strings - would you have to wrap each string in a managed object, or is there any kind of thin NSManagedObject wrapper around NSString already available? – Kendall Helmstetter Gelner Jul 09 '09 at 17:53
  • How to you turn the array of strings to data?? (I found a workaround for this issue that involved me not having to use an array of strings, but I'm still curious for a solution) – gburgoon Jul 09 '09 at 19:41
  • 9
    The opposite is `NSArray* array = [NSKeyedUnarchiver unarchiveObjectWithData:arrayData];` – Resh32 Nov 13 '12 at 09:28
  • The correct way is to create another entity table, and add a relationship between these two entities! I think it is a waste of time for archiving && unarchiving the array. – flypig Nov 26 '13 at 03:02
  • Why is that adding another entity table and having the relationship is "better"? Is it because it's explicit? – huggie May 01 '14 at 08:03