I’m loading data that appears throughout my app from a content management system's API. Once the data has finished loading, I’d like to be able to change a boolean from false to true, then make that boolean readable by every other view in my app so that I can create conditional if/else statements depending on whether the data has loaded yet or not.
I’ve tried doing this by creating an Observable Object at the root level to store the boolean, setting it to false by default:
#main
struct MyApp: App {
#StateObject var dataLoadingObject = DataHasLoaded()
var body: some Scene {
WindowGroup {
ContentView()
.environmentObject(dataLoadingObject)
}
}
}
class DataHasLoaded: ObservableObject {
#Published var status: Bool = false
}
Then, in my data model file, I've tried to reference that Observable Object using #EnvironmentObject and then switch the boolean to true once the data has loaded:
class DataStore: ObservableObject {
#Published var stories: [Story] = storyData
#EnvironmentObject var dataLoadingObject: DataHasLoaded
init() {
// Fetching and appending
// the data here
self.dataLoadingObject.status = true
}
}
The app builds successfully, but when the data loads it crashes and I get this error message: Thread 1: Fatal error: No ObservableObject of type DataHasLoaded found. A View.environmentObject(_:) for DataHasLoaded may be missing as an ancestor of this view.
It seems like the issue is that my data model view isn't explicitly a child of ContentView(), so it's not aware of the Environment Object. That's where I get stuck. Do I:
a) Try to get my data model to be a child of ContentView()?
b) Use something that doesn't require a parent/child relationship?
c) Solve this some totally different way?
d) Continue to bang my head against my desk?
Thanks for your help!
#EnvironmentObject can be used in View only. It can't be used in ObservableObject.
You can pass DataHasLoaded in init instead:
class DataStore: ObservableObject {
#Published var stories: [Story] = storyData
var dataLoadingObject: DataHasLoaded
init(dataLoadingObject: DataHasLoaded) {
self.dataLoadingObject = dataLoadingObject
...
}
}
Just make sure you always pass the same instance.
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 trying to build a little app in SwiftUI. It is supposed to show a list of items an maybe change those. However, I am not able to figure out, how the data flow works correctly, so that changes will be reflected in my list.
Let's say I have a class of Item like this:
class Item: Identifiable {
let id = UUID()
var name: String
var dateCreated: Date
}
And this class has an initializer, that assigns each member a useful random value.
Now let's say I want to store a list of items in another class like this:
class ItemStore {
var items = [Item]()
}
This item store is part of my SceneDelegate and is handed to the ContextView.
Now what I want to do is hand one element to another view (from the stack of a NavigationView), where it will be changed, but I don't know how to save the changes made so that they will be reflected in the list, that is shown in the ContextView.
My idea is to make the item store an environment object. But what do I have to do within the item class and how do I have to pass the item to the other view, so that this works?
I already tried something with the videos from Apple's WWDC, but the wrappers there are deprecated, so that didn't work.
Any help is appreciated. Thanks a lot!
The possible approach is to use ObservableObject (from Combine) for storage
class ItemStore: ObservableObject {
#Published var items = [Item]()
// ... other code
}
class Item: ObservableObject, Identifiable {
let id = UUID()
#Published var name: String
#Published var dateCreated: Date
// ... other code
}
and in dependent views
struct ItemStoreView: View {
#ObservedObject var store: ItemStore
// ... other code
}
struct ItemView: View {
#ObservedObject var item: Item
// ... other code
}
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....
In order to make my code testable, I'm trying to adhere to Liskov's substitution principle by having my SwiftUI views depend on protocols rather than concrete types. This allows me to easily swap implementations and allows me to easily build mocks for testing. Here's an example of what I'm trying to do:
protocol DashboardViewModel: ObservableObject {
var orders: [Order] { get }
}
My DashboardViewModel needs to communicate changes back to its dependents, so I've also attached ObservableObject as a transitive requirement.
This seems to be a problem. You cannot achieve LSP if you have associated type requirements. Here's the error I got from my SwiftUI view class that depended on my view model:
struct DashboardView: View {
#ObservedObject var viewModel: DashboardViewModel
}
Protocol 'DatastoreProtocol' can only be used as a generic constraint because it has Self or associated type requirements
I ended up doing this instead:
protocol DashboardViewModel {
var orders: [Order] { get }
var objectWillChange: AnyPublisher<Void, Never> { get }
}
This also requires dependents to do additional work to observe for state changes. This takes away the conveniences of using property wrappers - mainly the ability for dependents to observe for state changes using #ObservedObject. Using this alternative leads us to code like this:
struct DashboardView: View {
let viewModel: DashboardViewModel
var viewModelSubscriber: AnyCancellable!
// MARK: - Used only to force a re-render of this view
#State private var reload = false
init(viewModel: DashboardViewModel) {
self.viewModel = viewModel
viewModelSubscriber = viewModel.objectWillChange.sink { _ in
self.reload.toggle()
}
}
}
This is a tad distasteful to look at:
Created a #State variable that is only used to force an update of the view, because we cannot utilize SwiftUI property wrappers to observe for state changes
Created a AnyCancellable! variable to hold a subscription to objectWillChange from the view model. This is necessary to detect state changes from the DashboardViewModel
Added the subscription call in the initializer that only toggles the #State variable to force a retrieval of new data from the view model
I feel like there should be a much better way of handling this. Looking for help!
One way to solve this is to make your view generic:
protocol DashboardViewModel: ObservableObject {
var orders: [Order] { get }
}
struct DashboardView<Model: DashboardViewModel>: View {
#ObservedObject var viewModel: Model
}