Compile error on Property Wrapper in Swift 5.1 - swift

I'm figuring out Property Wrappers in Swift, but I seem to miss something.
This is how I wrote a property wrapper for a dependency injection framework we use:
#propertyWrapper
struct Inject<Value> {
var _value: Value
var wrappedValue: Value {
get {
return _value
}
set {
_value = newValue
}
}
init(_ container: Container = AppContainer.shared) {
do {
_value = try container.resolve(Value.self)
} catch let e {
fatalError(e.localizedDescription)
}
}
}
But when I use it in my class like below, I get a compile error. I've seen a lot of examples that to me do the exact same thing but probably there are some differences.
class X: UIViewController {
#Inject var config: AppConfiguration
....
override func viewWillAppear(_ animated: Bool) {
super.viewWillAppear(animated)
config.johnDoSomething() // Compile error: 'AppConfiguration' is not convertible to 'AppConfiguration?'
}
}
I few days ago I came across a reference that Xcode had compile issues with Generic Property Wrappers, but I can't find it anymore. I'm not sure if that's relevant but maybe somebody on SO can help me out.
Using Xcode 11.3.1
As requested, hereby a reprex (one file in playground):
import UIKit
/// This class is only to mimick the behaviour of our Dependency Injection framework.
class AppContainer {
static let shared = AppContainer()
var index: [Any] = ["StackOverflow"]
func resolve<T>(_ type: T.Type) -> T {
return index.first(where: { $0 as? T != nil }) as! T
}
}
/// Definition of the Property Wrapper.
#propertyWrapper
struct Inject<Value> {
var _value: Value
var wrappedValue: Value {
get {
return _value
}
set {
_value = newValue
}
}
init(_ container: AppContainer = AppContainer.shared) {
_value = container.resolve(Value.self)
}
}
/// A very minimal case where the compile error occurs.
class X {
#Inject var text: String
init() { }
}

Just dealing with your "reprex":
Change
#Inject var text: String
to
#Inject() var text: String

Related

Swinject always return nil when trying to resolve any object

I have the following Swinject implementation in my app -
import Foundation
import Swinject
#propertyWrapper
struct Inject<Component> {
let wrappedValue: Component
init() {
self.wrappedValue = Resolver.shared.resolve(Component.self)
}
}
class Resolver {
static let shared = Resolver()
private var container = buildContainer()
func resolve<T>(_ type: T.Type) -> T {
container.resolve(T.self)!
}
}
func buildContainer() -> Container {
let container = Container()
container.register(BasicApplicationNetworkService.self) { _ in
return BasicApplicationNetworkService()
}.inObjectScope(.container)
container.register(BasicApplicationViewModel.self) { resolver in
return BasicApplicationViewModel()
}.inObjectScope(.container)
container.register(BasicApplicationView.self) { resolver in
return BasicApplicationView()
}.inObjectScope(.container)
return container
}
#main
struct BasicApplicationApp: App {
#Inject
var statingView : BasicApplicationView
var body: some Scene {
WindowGroup {
statingView
}
}
}
I always get a Unexpectedly found nil while unwrapping an Optional value on my App struct when initialising.
Can't figure out what I am missing - I have a singleton object that should be initialized on runtime. Something in the Resolver class seems missing, but when debugging this code it does indeed go through the buildContainer() method and intializes what it's supposed to initialise - but still nil is being returned. Seems like something really obvious but it's 0:44 AM so hopefully someone is more awake then I am...

How to avoid a retain cycle on my custom dependency injection tool?

I have created a custom propertyWrapper to inject my dependencies in code so when testing the code, I can pass a mock in place using the WritableKeyPath link to the object in memory.
This is how I would use it in production code. It is very convenient as I don't need to pass the object inside an initializer.
#Injected(\.child) var child
And this is how I would use it in my unit tests to pass the mock in place of the WritableKeyPath.
let parentMock = ParentMock()
InjectedDependency[\.parent] = parentMock
The thing is that in some part of the code where I am trying to use it, there seems to be ghost objects that are being created when the Child class would need to have access to the Parent class in a cycle. When I am making a look up and play with it in the Playground, I could have noticed that there are two objects created when linked to each others, and only one deallocation for each of them instead of two when setting the variable to nil.
How can I update my #propertyWrapper or what could be improved on this solution to make it work as expected? How come two objects are created instead of them making a references to the objects in memory?
So the use in code of this custom dependency injection tool is set below.
I have implemented the classic way with a weak var parent: Parent? to deallocate the object in memory with no issue to showcase what I was expected.
protocol ParentProtocol {}
class Parent: ParentProtocol {
//var child: Child?
#Injected(\.child) var child
init() { print("🔔 Allocating Parent in memory") }
deinit { print ("♻️ Deallocating Parent from memory") }
}
protocol ChildProtocol {}
class Child: ChildProtocol {
//weak var parent: Parent?
#Injected(\.parent) var parent
init() { print("🔔 Allocating Child in memory") }
deinit { print("♻️ Deallocating Child from memory") }
}
var mary: Parent? = Parent()
var tom: Child? = Child()
mary?.child = tom!
tom?.parent = mary!
// When settings the Parent and Child to nil,
// both are expected to be deallocating.
mary = .none
tom = .none
This is the response in the log when using the custom dependency injection solution.
🔔 Allocating Parent in memory
🔔 Allocating Child in memory
🔔 Allocating Child in memory // Does not appear when using the weak reference.
♻️ Deallocating Child from memory
🔔 Allocating Parent in memory // Does not appear when using the weak reference.
♻️ Deallocating Parent from memory
This is the implementation of my custom PropertyWrapper to handle the dependency injection following the keys of the Parent and the Child for the example of use.
// The key protocol for the #propertyWrapper initialization.
protocol InjectedKeyProtocol {
associatedtype Value
static var currentValue: Self.Value { get set }
}
// The main dependency injection custom tool.
#propertyWrapper
struct Injected<T> {
private let keyPath: WritableKeyPath<InjectedDependency, T>
var wrappedValue: T {
get { InjectedDependency[keyPath] }
set { InjectedDependency[keyPath] = newValue }
}
init(_ keyPath: WritableKeyPath<InjectedDependency, T>) {
self.keyPath = keyPath
}
}
// The custom tool to use in unit tests to implement the mock
// within the associated WritableKeyPath.
struct InjectedDependency {
private static var current = InjectedDependency()
static subscript<K>(key: K.Type) -> K.Value where K: InjectedKeyProtocol {
get { key.currentValue }
set { key.currentValue = newValue }
}
static subscript<T>(_ keyPath: WritableKeyPath<InjectedDependency, T>) -> T {
get { current[keyPath: keyPath] }
set { current[keyPath: keyPath] = newValue }
}
}
// The Parent and Child keys to access the object in memory.
extension InjectedDependency {
var parent: ParentProtocol {
get { Self[ParentKey.self] }
set { Self[ParentKey.self] = newValue }
}
var child: ChildProtocol {
get { Self[ChildKey.self] }
set { Self[ChildKey.self] = newValue }
}
}
// The instantiation of the value linked to the key.
struct ParentKey: InjectedKeyProtocol {
static var currentValue: ParentProtocol = Parent()
}
struct ChildKey: InjectedKeyProtocol {
static var currentValue: ChildProtocol = Child()
}
Many changes, so just compare - in general we need to think about reference counting, ie. who keeps references... and so it works only for reference-types.
Tested with Xcode 13.3 / iOS 15.4
protocol ParentProtocol: AnyObject {}
class Parent: ParentProtocol {
//var child: Child?
#Injected(\.child) var child
init() { print("🔔 Allocating Parent in memory") }
deinit { print ("♻️ Deallocating Parent from memory") }
}
protocol ChildProtocol: AnyObject {}
class Child: ChildProtocol {
//weak var parent: Parent?
#Injected(\.parent) var parent
init() { print("🔔 Allocating Child in memory") }
deinit { print("♻️ Deallocating Child from memory") }
}
protocol InjectedKeyProtocol {
associatedtype Value
static var currentValue: Self.Value? { get set }
}
// The main dependency injection custom tool.
#propertyWrapper
struct Injected<T> {
private let keyPath: WritableKeyPath<InjectedDependency, T?>
var wrappedValue: T? {
get { InjectedDependency[keyPath] }
set { InjectedDependency[keyPath] = newValue }
}
init(_ keyPath: WritableKeyPath<InjectedDependency, T?>) {
self.keyPath = keyPath
}
}
// The custom tool to use in unit tests to implement the mock
// within the associated WritableKeyPath.
struct InjectedDependency {
private static var current = InjectedDependency()
static subscript<K>(key: K.Type) -> K.Value? where K: InjectedKeyProtocol {
get { key.currentValue }
set { key.currentValue = newValue }
}
static subscript<T>(_ keyPath: WritableKeyPath<InjectedDependency, T?>) -> T? {
get { current[keyPath: keyPath] }
set { current[keyPath: keyPath] = newValue }
}
}
// The Parent and Child keys to access the object in memory.
extension InjectedDependency {
var parent: ParentProtocol? {
get { Self[ParentKey.self] }
set { Self[ParentKey.self] = newValue }
}
var child: ChildProtocol? {
get { Self[ChildKey.self] }
set { Self[ChildKey.self] = newValue }
}
}
// The instantiation of the value linked to the key.
struct ParentKey: InjectedKeyProtocol {
static weak var currentValue: ParentProtocol?
}
struct ChildKey: InjectedKeyProtocol {
static weak var currentValue: ChildProtocol?
}
Output for test code:
Complete test module in project is here

SwiftUI ForEach with Array of SubClasses

I have found a weird issue with SwiftUI's ForEach (and List) where if you use an Array of subclass types where the parent class implements BindableObject, the ForEach loop insists each item is of the base class type not the Subclass you are using, see my example code below. A little experimenting has found if the subclass implements BindableObject then the issue goes away, which in the example I have shown is OK, but often is not really suitable.
Anybody seen this know how you are suppose to deal with this or perhaps this is a bug and I should raise it with Apple?
class Bar: BindableObject {
let didChange = PassthroughSubject<Bar, Never>()
let name: String
init(name aName: String) {
name = aName
}
}
class Foo: Bar {
let value: Int
init(name aName: String, value aValue: Int) {
value = aValue
super.init(name:aName)
}
}
let arrayOfFoos: Array<Foo> = [ Foo(name:"Alpha",value:12), Foo(name:"Beta",value:13)]
struct ContentView : View {
var body: some View {
VStack {
ForEach(arrayOfFoos) { aFoo in
Text("\(aFoo.name) = \(aFoo.value)") // error aFoo is a Bar not a Foo
}
}
}
}
Tried this on Xcode Beta 2
I think this is not a bug but rather a "feature" of Swift type system and SwiftUI API.
If you look at the signature of ForEach (just Cmd + Click on ForEach)
public init(_ data: Data, content: #escaping (Data.Element.IdentifiedValue) -> Content)
you can notice that it accepts Data.Element.IdentifiedValue type
So, from your example
struct ContentView : View {
var body: some View {
VStack {
ForEach(arrayOfFoos) { aFoo in
Text("\(aFoo.name) = \(aFoo.value)") // error aFoo is a Bar not a Foo
}
}
}
}
aFoo local value has type Foo.IdentifiedValue
Lets ask Swift what it thinks about this type:
Foo.IdentifiedValue.self == Bar.IdentifiedValue.self // true
Foo.IdentifiedValue.self == Foo.self // false
Foo.IdentifiedValue.self == Bar.self // true
As you can see, Foo.IdentifiedValue is actually Bar.
To bypass this we can create a wrapper using a new feature of Swift 5.1 - 'Key Path Member Lookup'! :D
I updated your example. Added AnyBindable class and mapped elements of arrayOfFoos to it.
class Bar: BindableObject {
let didChange = PassthroughSubject<Void, Never>()
let name: String
init(name aName: String) {
name = aName
}
}
class Foo: Bar {
let value: Int
init(name aName: String, value aValue: Int) {
value = aValue
super.init(name:aName)
}
}
#dynamicMemberLookup
class AnyBindable<T: BindableObject>: BindableObject {
let didChange: T.PublisherType
let wrapped: T
init(wrapped: T) {
self.wrapped = wrapped
self.didChange = wrapped.didChange
}
subscript<U>(dynamicMember keyPath: KeyPath<T, U>) -> U {
return wrapped[keyPath: keyPath]
}
}
let arrayOfFoos = [ Foo(name:"Alpha",value:12), Foo(name:"Beta",value:13)]
.map(AnyBindable.init)
struct ContentView : View {
var body: some View {
VStack {
ForEach(arrayOfFoos) { aFoo in
Text("\(aFoo.name) = \(aFoo.value)") // it compiles now
}
}
}
}

Can a Swift Property Wrapper reference the owner of the property its wrapping?

From within a property wrapper in Swift, can you someone refer back to the instance of the class or struck that owns the property being wrapped? Using self doesn't obviously work, nor does super.
I tried to pass in self to the property wrapper's init() but that doesn't work either because self on Configuration is not yet defined when #propertywrapper is evaluated.
My use case is in a class for managing a large number of settings or configurations. If any property is changed, I just want to notify interested parties that something changed. They don't really need to know which value just, so use something like KVO or a Publisher for each property isn't really necessary.
A property wrapper looks ideal, but I can't figure out how to pass in some sort of reference to the owning instance that the wrapper can call back to.
References:
SE-0258
enum PropertyIdentifier {
case backgroundColor
case textColor
}
#propertyWrapper
struct Recorded<T> {
let identifier:PropertyIdentifier
var _value: T
init(_ identifier:PropertyIdentifier, defaultValue: T) {
self.identifier = identifier
self._value = defaultValue
}
var value: T {
get { _value }
set {
_value = newValue
// How to callback to Configuration.propertyWasSet()?
//
// [self/super/...].propertyWasSet(identifier)
}
}
}
struct Configuration {
#Recorded(.backgroundColor, defaultValue:NSColor.white)
var backgroundColor:NSColor
#Recorded(.textColor, defaultValue:NSColor.black)
var textColor:NSColor
func propertyWasSet(_ identifier:PropertyIdentifier) {
// Do something...
}
}
The answer is no, it's not possible with the current specification.
I wanted to do something similar. The best I could come up with was to use reflection in a function at the end of init(...). At least this way you can annotate your types and only add a single function call in init().
fileprivate protocol BindableObjectPropertySettable {
var didSet: () -> Void { get set }
}
#propertyDelegate
class BindableObjectProperty<T>: BindableObjectPropertySettable {
var value: T {
didSet {
self.didSet()
}
}
var didSet: () -> Void = { }
init(initialValue: T) {
self.value = initialValue
}
}
extension BindableObject {
// Call this at the end of init() after calling super
func bindProperties(_ didSet: #escaping () -> Void) {
let mirror = Mirror(reflecting: self)
for child in mirror.children {
if var child = child.value as? BindableObjectPropertySettable {
child.didSet = didSet
}
}
}
}
You cannot do this out of the box currently.
However, the proposal you refer to discusses this as a future direction in the latest version:
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0258-property-wrappers.md#referencing-the-enclosing-self-in-a-wrapper-type
For now, you would be able to use a projectedValue to assign self to.
You could then use that to trigger some action after setting the wrappedValue.
As an example:
import Foundation
#propertyWrapper
class Wrapper {
let name : String
var value = 0
weak var owner : Owner?
init(_ name: String) {
self.name = name
}
var wrappedValue : Int {
get { value }
set {
value = 0
owner?.wrapperDidSet(name: name)
}
}
var projectedValue : Wrapper {
self
}
}
class Owner {
#Wrapper("a") var a : Int
#Wrapper("b") var b : Int
init() {
$a.owner = self
$b.owner = self
}
func wrapperDidSet(name: String) {
print("WrapperDidSet(\(name))")
}
}
var owner = Owner()
owner.a = 4 // Prints: WrapperDidSet(a)
My experiments based on : https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0258-property-wrappers.md#referencing-the-enclosing-self-in-a-wrapper-type
protocol Observer: AnyObject {
func observableValueDidChange<T>(newValue: T)
}
#propertyWrapper
public struct Observable<T: Equatable> {
public var stored: T
weak var observer: Observer?
init(wrappedValue: T, observer: Observer?) {
self.stored = wrappedValue
}
public var wrappedValue: T {
get { return stored }
set {
if newValue != stored {
observer?.observableValueDidChange(newValue: newValue)
}
stored = newValue
}
}
}
class testClass: Observer {
#Observable(observer: nil) var some: Int = 2
func observableValueDidChange<T>(newValue: T) {
print("lol")
}
init(){
_some.observer = self
}
}
let a = testClass()
a.some = 4
a.some = 6
The answer is yes! See this answer
Example code for calling ObservableObject publisher with a UserDefaults wrapper:
import Combine
import Foundation
class LocalSettings: ObservableObject {
static var shared = LocalSettings()
#Setting(key: "TabSelection")
var tabSelection: Int = 0
}
#propertyWrapper
struct Setting<T> {
private let key: String
private let defaultValue: T
init(wrappedValue value: T, key: String) {
self.key = key
self.defaultValue = value
}
var wrappedValue: T {
get {
UserDefaults.standard.object(forKey: key) as? T ?? defaultValue
}
set {
UserDefaults.standard.set(newValue, forKey: key)
}
}
public static subscript<EnclosingSelf: ObservableObject>(
_enclosingInstance object: EnclosingSelf,
wrapped wrappedKeyPath: ReferenceWritableKeyPath<EnclosingSelf, T>,
storage storageKeyPath: ReferenceWritableKeyPath<EnclosingSelf, Setting<T>>
) -> T {
get {
return object[keyPath: storageKeyPath].wrappedValue
}
set {
(object.objectWillChange as? ObservableObjectPublisher)?.send()
UserDefaults.standard.set(newValue, forKey: object[keyPath: storageKeyPath].key)
}
}
}

Is there a way to set associated objects in Swift?

Coming from Objective-C you can call function objc_setAssociatedObject between 2 objects to have them maintain a reference, which can be handy if at runtime you don't want an object to be destroyed until its reference is removed also. Does Swift have anything similar to this?
Here is a simple but complete example derived from jckarter's answer.
It shows how to add a new property to an existing class. It does it by defining a computed property in an extension block. The computed property is stored as an associated object:
import ObjectiveC
// Declare a global var to produce a unique address as the assoc object handle
private var AssociatedObjectHandle: UInt8 = 0
extension MyClass {
var stringProperty:String {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedObjectHandle) as! String
}
set {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedObjectHandle, newValue, objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
}
EDIT:
If you need to support getting the value of an uninitialized property and to avoid getting the error unexpectedly found nil while unwrapping an Optional value, you can modify the getter like this:
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedObjectHandle) as? String ?? ""
}
The solution supports all the value types as well, and not only those that are automagically bridged, such as String, Int, Double, etc.
Wrappers
import ObjectiveC
final class Lifted<T> {
let value: T
init(_ x: T) {
value = x
}
}
private func lift<T>(x: T) -> Lifted<T> {
return Lifted(x)
}
func setAssociatedObject<T>(object: AnyObject, value: T, associativeKey: UnsafePointer<Void>, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy) {
if let v: AnyObject = value as? AnyObject {
objc_setAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey, v, policy)
}
else {
objc_setAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey, lift(value), policy)
}
}
func getAssociatedObject<T>(object: AnyObject, associativeKey: UnsafePointer<Void>) -> T? {
if let v = objc_getAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey) as? T {
return v
}
else if let v = objc_getAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey) as? Lifted<T> {
return v.value
}
else {
return nil
}
}
A possible
Class extension (Example of usage)
extension UIView {
private struct AssociatedKey {
static var viewExtension = "viewExtension"
}
var referenceTransform: CGAffineTransform? {
get {
return getAssociatedObject(self, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.viewExtension)
}
set {
if let value = newValue {
setAssociatedObject(self, value: value, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.viewExtension, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
}
}
I wrote a modern wrapper available at https://github.com/b9swift/AssociatedObject
You may be surprised that it even supports Swift structures for free.
Obviously, this only works with Objective-C objects. After fiddling around with this a bit, here's how to make the calls in Swift:
import ObjectiveC
// Define a variable whose address we'll use as key.
// "let" doesn't work here.
var kSomeKey = "s"
…
func someFunc() {
objc_setAssociatedObject(target, &kSomeKey, value, UInt(OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN))
let value : AnyObject! = objc_getAssociatedObject(target, &kSomeKey)
}
Update in Swift 3.0
For example this is a UITextField
import Foundation
import UIKit
import ObjectiveC
// Declare a global var to produce a unique address as the assoc object handle
var AssociatedObjectHandle: UInt8 = 0
extension UITextField
{
var nextTextField:UITextField {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedObjectHandle) as! UITextField
}
set {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedObjectHandle, newValue, .OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
}
Klaas answer just for Swift 2.1:
import ObjectiveC
let value = NSUUID().UUIDString
var associationKey: UInt8 = 0
objc_setAssociatedObject(parentObject, &associationKey, value, objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
let fetchedValue = objc_getAssociatedObject(parentObject, &associationKey) as! String
Just add #import <objc/runtime.h> on your brindging header file to access objc_setAssociatedObject under swift code
The above friend has answered your question, but if it is related to closure properties, please note:
```
import UIKit
public extension UICollectionView {
typealias XYRearrangeNewDataBlock = (_ newData: [Any]) -> Void
typealias XYRearrangeOriginaDataBlock = () -> [Any]
// MARK:- associat key
private struct xy_associatedKeys {
static var originalDataBlockKey = "xy_originalDataBlockKey"
static var newDataBlockKey = "xy_newDataBlockKey"
}
private class BlockContainer {
var rearrangeNewDataBlock: XYRearrangeNewDataBlock?
var rearrangeOriginaDataBlock: XYRearrangeOriginaDataBlock?
}
private var newDataBlock: BlockContainer? {
get {
if let newDataBlock = objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &xy_associatedKeys.newDataBlockKey) as? BlockContainer {
return newDataBlock
}
return nil
}
set(newValue) {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, xy_associatedKeys.newDataBlockKey, newValue, .OBJC_ASSOCIATION_COPY_NONATOMIC)
}
}
convenience init(collectionVewFlowLayout : UICollectionViewFlowLayout, originalDataBlock: #escaping XYRearrangeOriginaDataBlock, newDataBlock: #escaping XYRearrangeNewDataBlock) {
self.init()
let blockContainer: BlockContainer = BlockContainer()
blockContainer.rearrangeNewDataBlock = newDataBlock
blockContainer.rearrangeOriginaDataBlock = originalDataBlock
self.newDataBlock = blockContainer
}
```
For 2022, now very simple:
// Utils-tags.swift
// Just a "dumb Swift trick" to add a string tag to a view controller.
// For example, with UIDocumentPickerViewController you need to know
// "which button was clicked to launch a picker"
import UIKit
private var _docPicAssociationKey: UInt8 = 0
extension UIDocumentPickerViewController {
public var tag: String {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &_docPicAssociationKey)
as? String ?? ""
}
set(newValue) {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, &_docPicAssociationKey,
newValue, .OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN)
}
}
}