I want to create an array of weak references implementing a protocol for observable functionality.
If possible this protocol should have an associated type, so I would not need to create identical ones for each type.
However in Swift 4 this does not seem to work, what I want is basically this:
protocol DelegateBase: AnyObject {
associatedtype Item
func onDataUpdated(data: [Item])
}
protocol Delegate : DelegateBase where Item == Int {
// Will have func onDataUpdated(data: [Int])
}
// T should be a class implementing Delegate, but cannot find a way to
// define T in a way that the Swift compiler accepts it
class WeakListener<T> {
weak var listener : T?
init(listener: T) {
self.listener = listener
}
}
class Implementation {
val listeners = [WeakListener<Delegate>]()
}
If I define everything as non-generic I can make it work, but I would like the convenience of not having to copy paste a concrete version of DelegateBase for each type I want to support.
// This works but is clunky
protocol DelegateA {
func onDataUpdated(data: [Int])
}
// DelegateB with type Double, DelegateC with type X
class WeakListenerA {
weak var listener : DelegateA?
init(listener: DelegateA) {
self.listener = listener
}
}
// WeakListenerB with type Double, WeakListenerC with type X
class ImplementationA {
val listeners = [WeakListenerA]()
}
// ImplementationB with type Double, ImplementationC with type X
EDIT: Intended usage
Basically I want to implement remote-backed repository where UIViewControllers can listen in on events happening inside the repository even though they aren't actively requesting data.
I want the listener to be generic, so I don't need to clone everything for each type. I want weak references since then no manual work is needed for managing them apart from adding listeners.
protocol DelegateBase: AnyObject {
associatedtype Item
func onDataModified(data: [Item])
func onDataRefreshed(data: [Item])
}
protocol IntDelegate : DelegateBase where Item == Int {
// Will have
//func onDataModified(data: [Int])
//func onDataRefreshed(data: [Int])
}
// Listener should implement the delegate T, that extends DelegateBase
// with a type
class WeakListener<T : DelegateBase> {
weak var listener : T?
init(listener: T) {
self.listener = listener
}
}
class IntRepository {
var listeners = [WeakListener<IntDelegate>]()
var data = [Int]()
func addListener(_ listener: IntDelegate /* UIViewController implementing IntDelegate*/) {
listeners.add(listener)
}
func add() {
// data is updated, notify weak listeners
data.append(1)
for listener in listeners {
listener.listener?.onDataModified(data: data)
}
}
func refresh() {
// data refreshed from a remote source
for listener in listeners {
listener.listener?.onDataRefreshed(data: data)
}
}
fileprivate func cleanupListeners() {
self.listeners = self.listeners.filter({$0.listener != nil})
}
// Singleton for example
fileprivate static var _instance: IntImplementation!
public class func shared() -> IntImplementation {
if _instance == nil {
_instance = IntImplementation()
}
return _instance!
}
}
class IntViewController: UIViewController, IntDelegate {
override func viewDidLoad() {
IntImplementation.shared().addListener(self)
}
func onDataModified(data: [Int]) {
// update UI
}
func onDataRefreshed(data: [Int]) {
// update UI
}
}
Because the DelegateBase (and by extension, the Delegate) protocol has an associated type (unlike DelegateA), you cannot use it as a type; you can only use some concrete type that conforms to it.
For what you're trying to do, you don't actually need the Delegate protocol. You seem to want a WeakListener generic with respect to Item type, which you can declare like so:
class WeakListener<T: DelegateBase> {
weak var listener : T?
init(listener: T) {
self.listener = listener
}
}
In other words, the above works with some concrete T type that conforms to DelegateBase.
Let's say you had such a concrete type for Int:
class ConcreteIntDelegateA: DelegateBase {
func onDataUpdated(data: [Int]) {
// ...
}
}
Then you could create a WeakListener for ConcreteIntDelegateA because it conforms to DelegateBase and further specifies that an Item is Int
let listener: WeakListener<ConcreteIntDelegateA>
So, it works for a concrete type, but you cannot do this for a protocol DelegateBase, because DelegateBase doesn't conform to DelegateBase (protocols don't conform to protocols, including themselves):
let listener: WeakListener<DelegateBase> // ERROR
This gives you the ability to create array of listeneres for a specific concrete type, e.g. [WeakListener<ConcreteIntDelegateA>] or [WeakListener<ConcreteIntDelegateB>], but not mixed, because these types are unrelated even though both ConcreteDelegateX conform to DelegateBase.
To get around it is to create a type-erased type, e.g. class AnyDelegate<Item>: DelegateBase, which takes a concrete type in its init:
class AnyDelegate<Item>: DelegateBase {
private let onDataUpdated: ([Item]) -> Void
init<C: DelegateBase>(_ c: C) where C.Item == Item {
self.sonDataUpdated = c.onDataUpdated(data:)
}
func onDataUpdated(data: [Item]) {
onDataUpdated(data)
}
}
let anyIntA = AnyDelegate(ConcreteIntDelegateA())
let anyIntB = AnyDelegate(ConcreteIntDelegateB())
let anyIntListeners: [WeakListener<AnyDelegate<Int>>] = [anyIntA, anyIntB]
What I ended up doing was just throwing away the DelegateBase. To provide some type conformance I created a generic base repository and enforce the delegate type during runtime when adding listeners
import UIKit
protocol IntDelegate : AnyObject {
func onDataModified(data: [Int])
func onDataRefreshed(data: [Int])
}
class WeakListener {
weak var listener : AnyObject?
init(listener: AnyObject) {
self.listener = listener
}
}
class RepositoryBase<T> {
private var _listeners = [WeakListener]()
var listeners: [T] {
get {
// Remove dead listeners
self._listeners = self._listeners.filter({($0.listener as? T) != nil})
return self._listeners.map({ $0.listener as! T })
}
}
func addListener(_ listener: AnyObject) {
assert(listener is T)
_listeners.append(WeakListener(listener: listener))
}
}
class IntRepository : RepositoryBase<IntDelegate> {
var data = [Int]()
func add() {
// data is updated, notify weak listeners
data.append(1)
for listener in self.listeners {
listener.onDataModified(data: data)
}
}
func refresh() {
// data refreshed from a remote source
for listener in self.listeners {
listener.onDataRefreshed(data: data)
}
}
// Singleton for example
fileprivate static var _instance: IntRepository!
public class func shared() -> IntRepository {
if _instance == nil {
_instance = IntRepository()
}
return _instance!
}
}
class IntViewController: IntDelegate {
func viewDidLoad() {
IntRepository.shared().addListener(self)
IntRepository.shared().add()
}
func onDataModified(data: [Int]) {
print("modified")
}
func onDataRefreshed(data: [Int]) {
print("refreshed")
}
}
IntViewController().viewDidLoad() // Prints "modified"
Related
I want to initialize the struct by receiving the "struct type"(?) by a specific logic as below.
As I abstracted the return value of the struct into MyProtocol had a declaration of init(), which seems a little awkward.
I'm not sure I can do this.
I'd like to get an undecided struct type returned, what should I do?
Is this for the best?
For your information, Opaque Type is not available because it needs to support iOS 13 or earlier.
protocol MyProtocol {
init() // Is this for the best?
}
struct AAA: MyProtocol {
var numberAAA: Int // Sample variable.
init() {
print("init AAA")
numberAAA = 100
}
}
struct BBB: MyProtocol {
var numberBBB: Int // Sample variable.
init() {
print("init BBB")
numberBBB = 200
}
}
class MyClass {
func mainLogic() {
let myStruct = randomStruct()
myStruct.init() // This is the reason init () declared in the MyProtocol.
}
func randomStruct() -> MyProtocol.Type {
if Bool.random() {
return AAA.self
} else {
return BBB.self
}
}
}
init() as a protocol requirement seems odd. No one is stopping you to do this and compiler should allow this, however I would consider making protocol based on some other requirement rather than just init().
Here's an attempt to do so -
protocol NumberOperation {
var number: Int { get set }
mutating func perform()
}
struct Incrementer: NumberOperation {
var number: Int
mutating func perform() {
number += 1
}
}
struct Decrementer: NumberOperation {
var number: Int
mutating func perform() {
number -= 1
}
}
struct Record<O: NumberOperation> {
public var operation: O
mutating func perform() {
operation.perform()
}
}
class MyClass {
func mainLogic() {
var record = getRecord(type: Incrementer.self)
record.perform()
}
func getRecord<O: NumberOperation>(type: O.Type) -> Record<O> {
if type == Incrementer.self {
return Record(operation: Incrementer(number: 1) as! O)
}
return Record(operation: Decrementer(number: 10) as! O)
}
}
This introduces a container type Record that holds/wraps our type based on the same protocol conformation. This does the same what you were doing, probably is easier to read/understand.
I have the below code which aims an abstraction -without being have to casting Decodables - for DataModels across the app. I wanted use these DataModels to centrelize them. This is how I far I came right now and I am kind of in dead end.
In this configuration, the code tells me that ProfileResponseDelegate cannot conform to ModelDelegate when ProfileResponseDelegate is a protocol, which makes sense.
protocol ModelDelegate: class {
associatedtype DataType: Decodable
func didReceive(data: DataType)
}
class Model<Type, Delegate: ModelDelegate> where Type == Delegate.DataType {
var data: Type?
weak var delegate: Delegate?
func requestData() { return }
}
protocol ProfileResponseDelegate: ModelDelegate where DataType == ProfileResponse {}
//throws Value of protocol type 'ProfileResponseDelegate' cannot conform to 'ModelDelegate'; only struct/enum/class types can conform to protocols
class ProfileResponseModel: Model<ProfileResponse, ProfileResponseDelegate> {
override func requestData() {
guard let data = data else {
// go to api to get data
return
}
delegate?.didReceive(data: data)
}
}
class Controller: UIViewController, ProfileResponseDelegate {
let model = ProfileResponseModel()
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
model.delegate = self
model.requestData()
}
func didReceive(data: ProfileResponse) {
//tell view code to update regarding data
}
}
When I change ProfileResponseDelegate to be a class -without not being a delegate anymore, but anyway- the code does not allow Controller to inherit from both UIViewController and ProfileResponseDelegate reasoning a class cannot inherit from multiple classes. which again makes sense.
class ProfileResponseDelegate: ModelDelegate {
typealias DataType = ProfileResponse
func didReceive(data: ProfileResponse) {
return
}
}
class Controller: UIViewController, ProfileResponseDelegate {
let model = ProfileResponseModel()
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
model.delegate = self
model.requestData()
}
override func didReceive(data: ProfileResponse) {
//tell view code to update regarding data
}
}
With respect to first configuration, I could not make it work. However for the second one, when Controller just inherits from ProfileResponseDelegate it works just fine.
I have to find a way to make this work -preferably the first configuration- and need your advise. Much appreciated in advance.
UPDATE
So I have removed the associatedType from the ModelDelegate and removed ProfileResponseModel. Right now code looks like this.
protocol ModelDelegate: class {
//associatedtype DataType: Decodable
func didReceive<T: Decodable>(data: T)
}
class Model<Type: Decodable> {
var data: Type?
weak var delegate: ModelDelegate?
func requestData() { return }
}
//protocol ProfileResponseDelegate: ModelDelegate where DataType == ProfileResponse {}
class ProfileResponseModel: Model<ProfileResponse> {
override func requestData() {
guard let data = data else {
// go to api to get data
return
}
delegate?.didReceive(data: data)
}
}
class Controller: UIViewController, ModelDelegate {
let model = ProfileResponseModel()
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
model.delegate = self
model.requestData()
}
func didReceive<T>(data: T) where T : Decodable {
//I want this `data` to come as what it is.
if let response = data as? ProfileResponse {
print(type(of: response))
}
}
}
It works likes this, however my ultimate purpose for doing this to not being have to cast the data to ProfileResponse here -and in other places to other Decodable type-.
I'm using Swift 2 and using WeakContainer as a way to store a set of weak objects, much like NSHashTable.weakObjectsHashTable()
struct WeakContainer<T: AnyObject> {
weak var value: T?
}
public protocol MyDelegate : AnyObject {
}
Then in my ViewController, I declare
public var delegates = [WeakContainer<MyDelegate>]
But it is error
Using MyDelegate as a concrete type conforming to protocol AnyObject is not supported
I see that the error is that WeakContainer has value member declared as weak, so T is expected to be object. But I also declare MyDelegate as AnyObject, too. How to get around this?
I ran into the same problem when I tried to implement weak containers. As #plivesey points out in a comment above, this seems to be a bug in Swift 2.2 / Xcode 7.3, but it is expected to work.
However, the problem does not occur for some Foundation protocols. For example, this compiles:
let container = WeakContainer<NSCacheDelegate>()
I found out that this works for protocols marked with the #objc attribute. You can use this as a workaround:
Workaround 1
#objc
public protocol MyDelegate : AnyObject { }
let container = WeakContainer<MyDelegate>() // No compiler error
As this can lead to other problems (some types cannot be represented in Objective-C), here is an alternative approach:
Workaround 2
Drop the AnyObject requirement from the container, and cast the value to AnyObject internally.
struct WeakContainer<T> {
private weak var _value:AnyObject?
var value: T? {
get {
return _value as? T
}
set {
_value = newValue as? AnyObject
}
}
}
protocol MyDelegate : AnyObject { }
var container = WeakContainer<MyDelegate>() // No compiler error
Caveat: Setting a value that conforms to T, but is not an AnyObject, fails.
I had the same idea to create weak container with generics.
As result I created wrapper for NSHashTable and did some workaround for your compiler error.
class WeakSet<ObjectType>: SequenceType {
var count: Int {
return weakStorage.count
}
private let weakStorage = NSHashTable.weakObjectsHashTable()
func addObject(object: ObjectType) {
guard object is AnyObject else { fatalError("Object (\(object)) should be subclass of AnyObject") }
weakStorage.addObject(object as? AnyObject)
}
func removeObject(object: ObjectType) {
guard object is AnyObject else { fatalError("Object (\(object)) should be subclass of AnyObject") }
weakStorage.removeObject(object as? AnyObject)
}
func removeAllObjects() {
weakStorage.removeAllObjects()
}
func containsObject(object: ObjectType) -> Bool {
guard object is AnyObject else { fatalError("Object (\(object)) should be subclass of AnyObject") }
return weakStorage.containsObject(object as? AnyObject)
}
func generate() -> AnyGenerator<ObjectType> {
let enumerator = weakStorage.objectEnumerator()
return anyGenerator {
return enumerator.nextObject() as! ObjectType?
}
}
}
Usage:
protocol MyDelegate : AnyObject {
func doWork()
}
class MyClass: AnyObject, MyDelegate {
fun doWork() {
// Do delegated work.
}
}
var delegates = WeakSet<MyDelegate>()
delegates.addObject(MyClass())
for delegate in delegates {
delegate.doWork()
}
It's not the best solution, because WeakSet can be initialized with any type, and if this type doesn't conform to AnyObject protocol then app will crash. But I don't see any better solution right now.
Why are you trying to use generics? I would suggest doing the following:
import Foundation
import UIKit
protocol MyDelegate : AnyObject {
}
class WeakContainer : AnyObject {
weak var value: MyDelegate?
}
class ViewController: UIViewController {
var delegates = [WeakContainer]()
}
There is also NSValue's nonretainedObject
If your Protocol can be marked as #obj then you can use code below
protocol Observerable {
associatedtype P : AnyObject
var delegates: NSHashTable<P> { get }
}
#objc protocol MyProtocol {
func someFunc()
}
class SomeClass : Observerable {
var delegates = NSHashTable<MyProtocol>.weakObjects()
}
Your issue is that WeakContainer requires its generic type T to be a subtype of AnyObject - a protocol declaration is not a subtype of AnyObject. You have four options:
Instead of declaring WeakContainer<MyDelegate> replace it with something that actually implements MyDelegate. The Swift-y approach for this is to use the AnyX pattern: struct AnyMyDelegate : MyDelegate { ... }
Define MyDelegate to be 'class bound' as protocol MyDelegate : class { ... }
Annotate MyDelegate with #obj which, essentially, makes it 'class bound'
Reformulate WeakContainer to not require its generic type to inherit from AnyObject. You'll be hard pressed to make this work because you need a property declared as weak var and there are limitation as to what types are accepted by weak var - which are AnyObject essentially.
Here is my implementation of WeakSet in pure Swift (without NSHashTable).
internal struct WeakBox<T: AnyObject> {
internal private(set) weak var value: T?
private var pointer: UnsafePointer<Void>
internal init(_ value: T) {
self.value = value
self.pointer = unsafeAddressOf(value)
}
}
extension WeakBox: Hashable {
var hashValue: Int {
return self.pointer.hashValue
}
}
extension WeakBox: Equatable {}
func ==<T>(lhs: WeakBox<T>, rhs: WeakBox<T>) -> Bool {
return lhs.pointer == rhs.pointer
}
public struct WeakSet<Element>: SequenceType {
private var boxes = Set<WeakBox<AnyObject>>()
public mutating func insert(member: Element) {
guard let object = member as? AnyObject else {
fatalError("WeakSet's member (\(member)) must conform to AnyObject protocol.")
}
self.boxes.insert(WeakBox(object))
}
public mutating func remove(member: Element) {
guard let object = member as? AnyObject else {
fatalError("WeakSet's member (\(member)) must conform to AnyObject protocol.")
}
self.boxes.remove(WeakBox(object))
}
public mutating func removeAll() {
self.boxes.removeAll()
}
public func contains(member: Element) -> Bool {
guard let object = member as? AnyObject else {
fatalError("WeakSet's member (\(member)) must conform to AnyObject protocol.")
}
return self.boxes.contains(WeakBox(object))
}
public func generate() -> AnyGenerator<Element> {
var generator = self.boxes.generate()
return AnyGenerator {
while(true) {
guard let box = generator.next() else {
return nil
}
guard let element = box.value else {
continue
}
return element as? Element
}
}
}
}
I want to implement an observer pattern, but I do not find the proper programming language constructs in Swift (also 2.0). The main problems are:
protocol and extension does not allow stored properties.
In classes we could add stored properties, but we can not force a subclass to override some of its inherited methods.
This is what I want:
{class|protocol|extension|whathaveyou} Sensor {
var observers = Array<Any>() // This is not possible in protocol and extensions
// The following is does not work in classes
func switchOn()
func switchOff()
var isRunning : Bool {
get
}
}
class LightSensor : Sensor {
//...
override func switchOn() {
// turn the sensor on
}
}
// In the class C, implementing the protocol 'ObserverProtocol'
var lightSensor = LightSensor()
lightSensor.switchOn()
lightSensor.registerObserver(self) // This is what I want
And here comes what is possible to my knowledge:
class Sensor {
private var observers = Array<Observer>()
func registerObserver(observer:ObserverDelegate) {
observers.append(observer)
}
}
protocol SensorProtocol {
func switchOn()
func switchOff()
var isRunning : Bool {
get
}
}
class LightSensor : Sensor, SensorProtocol {
func switchOn() {
//
}
func switchOff() {
//
}
var isRunning : Bool {
get {
return // whatever
}
}
}
But this is not very convenient, because both Sensor and SensorProtocol should come hand in hand, and are both requirements the subclass LightSensor has to fulfill.
Any ideas?
A protocol is an abstract set of requirements shared across a number of (potentially very different) other objects. As such, it's illogical to store data in a protocol. That would be like global state. I can see that you want to define the specification for how the observers are stored though. That would also allow 'you' to remove 'someone else' from being an observer, and it's very restrictive about how the observers are stored.
So, your protocol should expose methods to add and remove 'yourself' as an observer. It's then the responsibility of the object implementing the protocol to decide how and where the observers are stored and to implement the addition and removal.
You could create a struct to work with your protocols, something like:
protocol Observer: class {
func notify(target: Any)
}
protocol Observable {
mutating func addObserver(observer: Observer)
mutating func removeObserver(observer: Observer)
}
struct Observation: Observable {
var observers = [Observer]()
mutating func addObserver(observer: Observer) {
print("adding")
observers.append(observer)
}
mutating func removeObserver(observer: Observer) {
print("removing")
for i in observers.indices {
if observers[i] === observer {
observers.removeAtIndex(i)
break
}
}
}
func notify(target: Any) {
print("notifying")
for observer in observers {
observer.notify(target)
}
}
}
struct ATarget: Observable {
var observation = Observation()
mutating func addObserver(observer: Observer) {
observation.addObserver(observer)
}
mutating func removeObserver(observer: Observer) {
observation.removeObserver(observer)
}
func notifyObservers() {
observation.notify(self)
}
}
class AnObserver: Observer {
func notify(target: Any) {
print("notified!")
}
}
let myObserver = AnObserver()
var myTarget: Observable = ATarget()
myTarget.addObserver(myObserver)
if let myTarget = myTarget as? ATarget {
myTarget.notifyObservers()
}
This is my solution in Swift 3
import UIKit
class ViewController: UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
var objectToObserve = ObjectToObserve()
let observer = Observer()
let observer1 = Observer()
objectToObserve.add(observer: observer, notifyOnRegister: true)
objectToObserve.add(observer: observer1, notifyOnRegister: true)
}
}
//
// MARK: Protocol
//
protocol Observing: class {
func doSomething()
func doSomethingClosure(completion: () -> Void)
}
protocol Observable {
}
extension Observable {
private var observers: [Observing] {
get {
return [Observing]()
}
set {
//Do nothing
}
}
mutating func add(observer: Observing, notifyOnRegister: Bool) {
if !observers.contains(where: { $0 === observer }) {
observers.append(observer)
if notifyOnRegister {
observer.doSomething()
observer.doSomethingClosure(completion: {
print("Completion")
})
}
}
}
mutating func remove(observer: Observing) {
observers = observers.filter({ $0 !== observer })
}
}
//
// MARK: Observing
//
class ObjectToObserve: Observable {
init() {
print("Init ObjectToObserve")
}
}
class Observer: Observing {
init() {
print("Init Observer")
}
func doSomething() {
print("Do something")
}
func doSomethingClosure(completion: () -> Void) {
print("Do something Closure")
completion()
}
}
All answers above incorrectly use an array for retaining the observers, which may create retain cycles because of the strong references.
Also in general you may not want to allow the same observer to register itself twice.
The presented solutions also are not general purpose or lack type safety. I reference my blog post here which presents a full solution in a Swifty manner:
https://www.behindmedia.com/2017/12/23/implementing-the-observer-pattern-in-swift/
Well, you can certainly overcome the restriction of not having stored properties on extensions.
Maybe that way you can complement one of the proposed solutions with an extension that helps you avoid creating the observer list in each subclass / protocol implementation.
Although extensions can't have stored properties, you can actually get them by using the Objective-C Runtime. Assuming you have a base class for your sensors (BaseSensor) and a protocol for observers (SensorObserver):
import Foundation
import ObjectiveC
private var MyObserverListKey: UInt8 = 0
extension BaseSensor {
var observers:[SensorObserver] {
get {
if let observers = objc_getAssociatedObject( self, &MyObserverListKey ) as? [SensorObserver] {
return observers
}
else {
var observers = [SensorObserver]()
objc_setAssociatedObject( self, &MyObserverListKey, observers, objc_AssociationPolicy(OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC) )
return observers
}
}
set(value) {
objc_setAssociatedObject( self, &MyObserverListKey, observers, objc_AssociationPolicy(OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC) )
}
}
}
To be clear, even though you would need BaseSensor and all Sensors to inherit from it in order to have this property, BaseSensor wouldn't actually implement the Sensor protocol.
It's a bit weird, but I think it would suit your needs:
class BaseSensor {
}
protocol Sensor {
func switchOn()
}
class LightSensor: BaseSensor, Sensor {
func switchOn() {
// whatever
}
}
With Swift 2.0 this would be much simpler, since you can use Protocol Extensions, so you could simply do this:
protocol Sensor {
func switchOn()
}
extension Sensor {
// Here the code from the previous implementation of the extension of BaseSensor
}
class LightSensor : Sensor {
func switchOn() {
// whatever
}
}
Way better.
I have a class that needs to call out to a delegate when one of its properties changes. Here are the simplified class and protocol for the delegate:
protocol MyClassDelegate: class {
func valueChanged(myClass: MyClass)
}
class MyClass {
weak var delegate: MyClassDelegate?
var currentValue: Int {
didSet {
if let actualDelegate = delegate {
actualDelegate.valueChanged(self)
}
}
}
init(initialValue: Int) {
currentValue = initialValue
}
}
This all works just fine. But, I want to make this class generic. So, I tried this:
protocol MyClassDelegate: class {
func valueChanged(genericClass: MyClass)
}
class MyClass<T> {
weak var delegate: MyClassDelegate?
var currentValue: T {
didSet {
if let actualDelegate = delegate {
actualDelegate.valueChanged(self)
}
}
}
init(initialValue: T) {
currentValue = initialValue
}
}
This throws two compiler errors. First, the line declaring valueChanged in the protocol gives: Reference to generic type 'MyClass' requires arguments in <...>. Second, the call to valueChanged in the didSet watcher throws: 'MyClassDelegate' does not have a member named 'valueChanged'.
I thought using a typealias would solve the problem:
protocol MyClassDelegate: class {
typealias MyClassValueType
func valueChanged(genericClass: MyClass<MyClassValueType>)
}
class MyClass<T> {
weak var delegate: MyClassDelegate?
var currentValue: T {
didSet {
if let actualDelegate = delegate {
actualDelegate.valueChanged(self)
}
}
}
init(initialValue: T) {
currentValue = initialValue
}
}
I seem to be on the right path, but I still have two compiler errors. The second error from above remains, as well as a new one on the line declaring the delegate property of MyClass: Protocol 'MyClassDelegate' can only be used as a generic constraint because it has Self or associated type requirements.
Is there any way to accomplish this?
It is hard to know what the best solution is to your problem without having more information, but one possible solution is to change your protocol declaration to this:
protocol MyClassDelegate: class {
func valueChanged<T>(genericClass: MyClass<T>)
}
That removes the need for a typealias in the protocol and should resolve the error messages that you've been getting.
Part of the reason why I'm not sure if this is the best solution for you is because I don't know how or where the valueChanged function is called, and so I don't know if it is practical to add a generic parameter to that function. If this solution doesn't work, post a comment.
You can use templates methods with type erasure...
protocol HeavyDelegate : class {
func heavy<P, R>(heavy: Heavy<P, R>, shouldReturn: P) -> R
}
class Heavy<P, R> {
typealias Param = P
typealias Return = R
weak var delegate : HeavyDelegate?
func inject(p : P) -> R? {
if delegate != nil {
return delegate?.heavy(self, shouldReturn: p)
}
return nil
}
func callMe(r : Return) {
}
}
class Delegate : HeavyDelegate {
typealias H = Heavy<(Int, String), String>
func heavy<P, R>(heavy: Heavy<P, R>, shouldReturn: P) -> R {
let h = heavy as! H // Compile gives warning but still works!
h.callMe("Hello")
print("Invoked")
return "Hello" as! R
}
}
let heavy = Heavy<(Int, String), String>()
let delegate = Delegate()
heavy.delegate = delegate
heavy.inject((5, "alive"))
Protocols can have type requirements but cannot be generic; and protocols with type requirements can be used as generic constraints, but they cannot be used to type values. Because of this, you won't be able to reference your protocol type from your generic class if you go this path.
If your delegation protocol is very simple (like one or two methods), you can accept closures instead of a protocol object:
class MyClass<T> {
var valueChanged: (MyClass<T>) -> Void
}
class Delegate {
func valueChanged(obj: MyClass<Int>) {
print("object changed")
}
}
let d = Delegate()
let x = MyClass<Int>()
x.valueChanged = d.valueChanged
You can extend the concept to a struct holding a bunch of closures:
class MyClass<T> {
var delegate: PseudoProtocol<T>
}
struct PseudoProtocol<T> {
var valueWillChange: (MyClass<T>) -> Bool
var valueDidChange: (MyClass<T>) -> Void
}
Be extra careful with memory management, though, because blocks have a strong reference to the object that they refer to. In contrast, delegates are typically weak references to avoid cycles.