I have three files: File A, File B and File C.
I want to change the value of an #State in File C from File B, but I would prefer to actually run the view in File C from File A.
Here are my files and code to help people understand the issue:
File A:
#import SwiftUI
struct ContentView: View {
var body: some View {
FileC()
}
}
File B:
#import SwiftUI
struct FileB: View {
var body: some View {
Button (action: {
variable = true // This is the variable I want to change.
})
{
Image("Image")
}
}
}
File C:
#import SwiftUI
struct FileC: View {
#State var variable = false;
var body: some View {
if variable == true {
Rectangle()
}
}
}
I have not tried anything that would resolve this issue as I have little experience in Swift and do not know what to do in this case. I hoped to access the variable from file B with something such as FileB().variable = true, but this only gave me various errors or did nothing at all.
I have read from other sources to use #Binding as an argument for when calling a view, but I want to be able to call the function without having that information available from the chosen file.
A source of truth, eg #State, needs to be in a common parent of all the Views it is needed. Pass down read access as let or write access as #Binding var.
To pass data up the hierarchy look at Preferences.
Another feature is to use closures, like how Button's action works.
Related
Update:
This question is already solved (see responses below). The correct way to do this is to get your Binding by projecting the
ObservableObject For example, $options.refreshRate.
TLDR version:
How do I get a SwiftUI Picker (or other API that relies on a local Binding) to immediately update my ObservedObject/EnvironmentObject. Here is more context...
The scenario:
Here is something I consistently need to do in every SwiftUI app I create...
I always make some class that stores any user preference (let's call this class Options and I make it an ObservableObject.
Any setting that needs to be consumed is marked with #Published
Any view that consumes this brings it in as a #ObservedObject or #EnvironmentObject and subscribes to changes.
This all works quite nicely. The trouble I always face is how to set this from the UI. From the UI, here is usually what I'm doing (and this should all sound quite normal):
I have some SwiftUI view like OptionsPanel that drives the Options class above and allows the user to choose their options.
Let's say we have some option defined by an enum:
enum RefreshRate {
case low, medium, high
}
Naturally, I'd choose a Picker in SwiftUI to set this... and the Picker API requires that my selection param be a Binding. This is where I find the issue...
The issue:
To make the Picker work, I usually have some local Binding that is used for this purpose. But, ultimately, I don't care about that local value. What I care about is immediately and instantaneously broadcasting that new value to the rest of the app. The moment I select a new refresh rate, I'd like immediately know that instant about the change. The ObservableObject (the Options class) object does this quite nicely. But, I'm just updating a local Binding. What I need to figure out is how to immediately translate the Picker's state to the ObservableObject every time it's changed.
I have a solution that works... but I don't like it. Here is my non-ideal solution:
The non-ideal solution:
The first part of the solution is quite actually fine, but runs into a snag...
Within my SwiftUI view, rather than do the simplest way to set a Binding with #State I can use an alternate initializer...
// Rather than this...
#ObservedObject var options: Options
#State var refreshRate: RefreshRate = .medium
// Do this...
#ObservedObject var options: Options
var refreshRate: Binding<RefreshRate>(
get: { self.options.refreshRate },
set: { self.options.refreshRate = $0 }
)
So far, this is great (in theory)! Now, my local Binding is directly linked to the ObservableObject. All changes to the Picker are immediately broadcast to the entire app.
But this doesn't actually work. And this is where I have to do something very messy and non-ideal to get it to work.
The code above produces the following error:
Cannot use instance member 'options' within property initializer; property initializers run before 'self' is available
Here my my (bad) workaround. It works, but it's awful...
The Options class provides a shared instance as a static property. So, in my options panel view, I do this:
#ObservedObject var options: Options = .shared // <-- This is still needed to tell SwiftUI to listen for updates
var refreshRate: Binding<RefreshRate>(
get: { Options.shared.refreshRate },
set: { Options.shared.refreshRate = $0 }
)
In practice, this actually kinda works in this case. I don't really need to have multiple instances... just that one. So, as long as I always reference that shared instance, everything works. But it doesn't feel well architected.
So... does anyone have a better solution? This seems like a scenario EVERY app on the face of the planet has to tackle, so it seems like someone must have a better way.
(I am aware some use an .onDisapear to sync local state to the ObservedObject but this isn't ideal either. This is non-ideal because I value having immediate updates for the rest of the app.)
The good news is you're trying way, way, way too hard.
The ObservedObject property wrapper can create this Binding for you. All you need to say is $options.refreshRate.
Here's a test playground for you to try out:
import SwiftUI
enum RefreshRate {
case low, medium, high
}
class Options: ObservableObject {
#Published var refreshRate = RefreshRate.medium
}
struct RefreshRateEditor: View {
#ObservedObject var options: Options
var body: some View {
// vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Picker("Refresh Rate", selection: $options.refreshRate) {
// ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Text("Low").tag(RefreshRate.low)
Text("Medium").tag(RefreshRate.medium)
Text("High").tag(RefreshRate.high)
}
.pickerStyle(.segmented)
}
}
struct ContentView: View {
#StateObject var options = Options()
var body: some View {
VStack {
RefreshRateEditor(options: options)
Text("Refresh rate: \(options.refreshRate)" as String)
}
.padding()
}
}
import PlaygroundSupport
PlaygroundPage.current.setLiveView(ContentView())
It's also worth noting that if you want to create a custom Binding, the code you wrote almost works. Just change it to be a computed property instead of a stored property:
var refreshRate: Binding<RefreshRate> {
.init(
get: { self.options.refreshRate },
set: { self.options.refreshRate = $0 }
)
}
If I understand your question correctly, you want
to Set a Published value in an ObservableObject from the UI (Picker, etc.) in SwiftUI.
There are many ways to do that, I suggest you use a ObservableObject class, and use it directly wherever you need a binding in a view, such as in a Picker.
The following example code shows one way of setting up your code to do that:
import Foundation
import SwiftUI
// declare your ObservableObject class
class Options: ObservableObject {
#Published var name = "Mickey"
}
struct ContentView: View {
#StateObject var optionModel = Options() // <-- initialise the model
let selectionSet = ["Mickey", "Mouse", "Goofy", "Donald"]
#State var showSheet = false
var body: some View {
VStack {
Text(optionModel.name).foregroundColor(.red)
Picker("names", selection: $optionModel.name) { // <-- use the model directly as a $binding
ForEach (selectionSet, id: \.self) { value in
Text(value).tag(value)
}
}
Button("Show other view") { showSheet = true }
}
.sheet(isPresented: $showSheet) {
SheetView(optionModel: optionModel) // <-- pass the model to other view, see also #EnvironmentObject
}
}
}
struct SheetView: View {
#ObservedObject var optionModel: Options // <-- receive the model
var body: some View {
VStack {
Text(optionModel.name).foregroundColor(.green) // <-- show updated value
}
}
}
If you really want to have a "useless" intermediate local variable, then use this approach:
struct ContentView: View {
#StateObject var optionModel = Options() // <-- initialise the model
let selectionSet = ["Mickey", "Mouse", "Goofy", "Donald"]
#State var showSheet = false
#State var localVar = "" // <-- the local var
var body: some View {
VStack {
Text(optionModel.name).foregroundColor(.red)
Picker("names", selection: $localVar) { // <-- using the localVar
ForEach (selectionSet, id: \.self) { value in
Text(value).tag(value)
}
}
.onChange(of: localVar) { newValue in
optionModel.name = newValue // <-- update the model
}
Button("Show other view") { showSheet = true }
}
.sheet(isPresented: $showSheet) {
SheetView(optionModel: optionModel) // <-- pass the model to other view, see also #EnvironmentObject
}
}
}
I would like help to further understand the implications of using the following 2 methods for driving data between multiple views.
My situation:
A parent view initialises multiple child views with data passed in.
This data is a big object.
Each view takes a different slice of the data.
Each view can manipulate the initial data (filtering, ordering etc)
Using an observableObeject to store this data and multiple published properties for each view :
can be passed in as an environment object that can be accessed by any view using #EnvironmentObject.
You can create a Binding to the published properties and change them.
Execute a method on the ObservableObject class and manipulate a property value which gets published using objectWillChange.send() inside the method.
I have achieved the desired listed above by using a struct with mutating methods. Once these properties are changed in the struct, the views which bind to these properties causes a re-render.
My struct does not do any async work. It sets initial values. Its properties are modified upon user action like clicking filter buttons.
Example
struct MyStruct {
var prop1 = "hello"
var prop2: [String] = []
init(prop2: [String]) {
self.prop2 = prop2
}
mutating func changeProp2(multiplier: Int) {
let computation = ...
prop2 = computation //<----- This mutates prop2 and so my view Binded to this value gets re-renderd.
}
}
struct ParentView: View {
var initValue: [String] // <- passed in from ContentView
#State private var myStruct: MyStruct
init(initValue: [String]) {
self.myStruct = MyStruct(prop2: initValue)
}
var body: some View {
VStack {
SiblingOne(myStruct: $myStruct)
SiblingTwo(myStruct: $myStruct)
}
}
}
struct SiblingOne: View {
#Binding var myStruct: MyStruct
var body: some View {
HStack{
Button {
myStruct.changeProp2(multiplier: 10)
} label: {
Text("Mutate Prop 2")
}
}
}
}
struct SiblingTwo: View {
#Binding var myStruct: MyStruct
var body: some View {
ForEach(Array(myStruct.prop2.enumerated()), id: \.offset) { idx, val in
Text(val)
}
}
}
Question:
What use cases are there for using an ObservableObject than using a struct that mutates its own properties?
There are overlap use cases however I wish to understand the differences where:
Some situation A favours ObservableObject
Some situation B favours struct mutating properties
Before I begin, when you say "these properties causes a re-render" nothing is actually re-rendered all that happens is all the body that depend on lets and #State vars that have changed are invoked and SwiftUI builds a tree of these values. This is super fast because its just creating values on the memory stack. It diffs this value tree with the previous and the differences are used to create/update/remove UIView objects on screen. The actual rendering is another level below that. So we refer to this as invalidation rather than render. It's good practice to "tighten" the invalidation for better performance, i.e. only declare lets/vars in that View that are actually used in the body to make it shorter. That being said no one has ever compared the performance between one large body and many small ones so the real gains are an unknown at the moment. Since these trees of values are created and thrown away it is important to only init value types and not any objects, e.g. don't init any NSNumberFormatter or NSPredicate objects as a View struct's let because they are instantly lost which is essentially a memory leak! Objects need to be in property wrappers so they are only init once.
In both of your example situations its best to prefer value types, i.e. structs to hold the data. If there is just simple mutating logic then use #State var struct with mutating funcs and pass it into subviews as a let if you need read access or #Binding var struct if you need write access.
If you need to persist or sync the data then that is when you would benefit from a reference type, i.e. an ObservableObject. Since objects are created on the memory heap these are more expensive to create so we should limit their use. If you would like the object's life cycle to be tied to something on screen then use #StateObject. We typically used one of these to download data but that is no longer needed now that we have .task which has the added benefit it will cancel the download automatically when the view dissapears, which no one remembered to do with #StateObject. However, if it is the model data that will never be deinit, e.g. the model structs will be loaded from disk and saved (asynchronously), then it's best to use a singleton object, and pass it in to the View hierarchy as an environment object, e.g. .environmentObject(Store.shared), then for previews you can use a model that is init with sample data rather that loaded from disk, e.g. .environmentObject(Store.preview). The advantage here is that the object can be passed into Views deep in the hierarchy without passing them all down as let object (not #ObservedObject because we wouldn't want body invovked on these intermediary Views that don't use the object).
The other important thing is your item struct should usually conform to Identifiable so you can use it in a ForEach View. I noticed in your code you used ForEach like a for loop on array indices, that's a mistake and will cause a crash. It's a View that you need to supply with Indentifiable data so it can track changes, i.e. moves, insertions, deletions. That is simply not possible with array indices, because if the item moves from 0 to 1 it still appears as 0.
Here are some examples of all that:
struct UserItem: Identifiable {
var username: String
var id: String {
username
}
}
class Store: ObservableObject {
static var shared = Store()
static var preview = Store(preview: true)
#Published var users: [UserItem] = []
init(preview: Bool = false) {
if (preview) {
users = loadSampleUsers()
}
else {
users = loadUsersFromDisk()
}
}
#main
struct TestApp: App {
var body: some Scene {
WindowGroup {
ContentView()
.environmentObject(Store.shared)
}
}
}
struct ContentView: View {
var body: some View {
NavigationView {
List {
ForEach($store.users) { $user in
UserView(user: $user)
}
}
}
}
}
struct ContentView_Previews: PreviewProvider {
static var previews: some View {
ContentView().environmentObject(Store.preview)
}
}
struct UserView: View {
#Binding var user: UserItem
var body: some View {
TextField("Username", text: $user.username)
}
}
I’m practicing MVVM and SwiftUI by making a simple practice app. The main view of the app is a list where presents a title (in each cell) that can change by user input (text field). By selecting the cell, the app presents you the detail view where it presents another text.
I managed to change the cell´s title but I can’t figure out how to change the text in the detail view and make it stay that way. When I change the text in the detail view and go back to the main view, after entering again, the text doesn’t stay the same.
How can I make the text in the detail view maintain the text of whatever the user writes?
Your Sandwish is a struct which means when you pass it around it's copied (See structure vs class in swift language). This also means that when you pass a sandwish:
CPCell(sandwish: sandwish)
...
struct CPCell: View {
#State var sandwish: Sandwish
...
}
a sandwish is copied - any changes you make on this copy will not apply to the original sandwish.
When you do $sandwish.name in CPCell you're already binding to a copy. And in the NavigationLink you're copying it again.
struct CPCell: View {
...
var body: some View {
NavigationLink(destination: SandwishDetail(sandwish: sandwish)) {
TextField("Record", text: $sandwish.name)
}
}
}
So in the SandwishDetail you're already using a copy of a copy of your original sandwish.
struct SandwishDetail: View {
#State var sandwish: Sandwish // <- this is not the same struct as in `ContentView`
...
}
One way is to make Sandwish a class. Another, maybe better, solution is to use #Binding.
Note that the change from #State var sandwish to #Binding is not enough. CPCell expects the sandwish parameter to be Binding<Sandwish>, so you can't just pass a struct of type Sandwish.
One of the solutions is to use an index to access a binding from the SandwishStore:
ForEach (0..<store.sandwishes.count, id:\.self) { index in
CPCell(sandwish: self.$store.sandwishes[index])
}
...
struct CPCell: View {
#Binding var sandwish: Sandwish
...
}
Also you should do the same for all other places where the compiler expects Binding<Sandwish> and you originally passed Sandwish.
Change #State to #Binding in Sandwish.swift and in your CPCell struct in ContentView.swift
If I pass a binding to another view can that 2nd view then pass the binding on and have the third view change the values in the first view or can this cause unexpected behavior?
For instance, if I have
struct FirstView: View {
#State var input: String = ""
var body: some View {
Form {
CustomTextField("Placeholder", $input)
}
}
}
struct CustomTextField: View {
#Binding var text: String
var body: some View {
ThirdView(text: $text)
}
}
struct ThirdView: View {
#Binding var text: String
var body: some View {
TextField("Result", $text)
}
}
I know the above is nonsensical - I'm only using it for demonstration purposes - but would the ThirdView properly update the state of the first?
I have had instances where it works fine and others where it doesn't but can't really find much of an explanation.
If I pass a binding to another view can that 2nd view then pass the binding on and have the third view change the values in the first view or can this cause unexpected behavior?
By my observation there are following variants:
1) If those views live in one view hierarchy (or one in another) then such combination work
2) If those views are in different view hierarchies (or views are replaced, eg. by navigation) then binding works only on one level, but deeper transfer has unexpected behavior (most usual defect is that intermediate views are not updated).
Code in question works (tested with Xcode 11.4 / iOS 13.4), because fits variant 1.
I have a class, a “clock face” with regular updates; it should display an array of metrics that change over time.
Because I’d like the clock to also be displayed in a widget, I’ve found that I had to put the class into a framework (perhaps there’s another way, but I’m too far down the road now). This appears to have caused a problem with SwiftUI and observable objects.
In my View I have:
#ObservedObject var clockFace: myClock
In the clock face I have:
class myClock: ObservableObject, Identifiable {
var id: Int
#Publish public var metric:[metricObject] = []
....
// at some point the array is mutated and the display updates
}
I don’t know if Identifiable is needed but it’s doesn’t make any difference to the outcome. The public is demanded by the compiler, but it’s always been like that anyway.
With these lines I get a runtime error as the app starts:
objc[31175] no class for metaclass
So I took off the #Published and changed to a manual update:
public var metric:[metricObject] = [] {
didSet {
self.objectWillChange.send()`
}
}
And now I get a display and by setting a breakpoint I can see the send() is being called at regular intervals. But the display won’t update unless I add/remove from the array. I’m guessing the computed variables (which make up the bulk of the metricObject change isn’t being seen by SwiftUI. I’ve subsequently tried adding a “dummy” Int to the myClock class and setting that to a random value to trying to trigger a manual refresh via a send() on it’s didSet with no luck.
So how can I force a periodic redraw of the display?
What is MetricObject and can you make it a struct so you get Equatable for free?
When I do this with an Int it works:
class PeriodicUpdater: ObservableObject {
#Published var time = 0
var subscriptions = Set<AnyCancellable>()
init() {
Timer
.publish(every: 1, on: .main, in: .default)
.autoconnect()
.sink(receiveValue: { _ in
self.time = self.time + 1
})
.store(in: &subscriptions)
}
}
struct ContentView: View {
#ObservedObject var updater = PeriodicUpdater()
var body: some View {
Text("\(self.updater.time)")
}
}
So it's taken a while but I've finally got it working. The problem seemed to be two-fold.
I had a class defined in my framework which controls the SwiftUI file. This class is sub-classed in both the main app and the widget.
Firstly I couldn't use #Published in the main class within the framework. That seemed to cause the error:
objc[31175] no class for metaclass
So I used #JoshHomman's idea of an iVar that's periodically updated but that didn't quite work for me. With my SwiftUI file, I had:
struct FRMWRKShape: Shape {
func drawShape(in rect: CGRect) -> Path {
// draw and return a shape
}
}
struct ContentView: View {
#ObservedObject var updater = PeriodicUpdater()
var body: some View {
FRMWRKShape()
//....
FRMWRKShape() //slightly different parameters are passed in
}
}
The ContentView was executed every second as I wanted, however the FRMWRKShape code was called but not executed(?!) - except on first starting up - so the view doesn't update. When I changed to something far less D.R.Y. such as:
struct ContentView: View {
#ObservedObject var updater = PeriodicUpdater()
var body: some View {
Path { path in
// same code as was in FRMWRKShape()
}
//....
Path { path in
// same code as was in FRMWRKShape()
// but slightly different parameters
}
}
}
Magically, the View was updated as I wanted it to be. I don't know if this is expected behaviour, perhaps someone can say whether I should file a Radar....