I want to initialize every time a struct with dictionaries. Later, I'm going to use its properties instead a dictionary's keys and values - it seems rather easier. However, when I try the code below, it tells me that "Return from initializer without initializing all stored properties" and "1. 'self.one' not initialized" and "2. 'self.two' not initialized". My question is how to initialize a struct from a dictionary, so that I have basically a struct with the contents of the dictionary? Or how to transform it into struct?
struct Blabla {
var one: String
var two: [Int]
init(three: [String: [Int]]) {
for i in three {
self.one = i.key
self.two = i.value
}
} ERROR! - Return from initializer without initializing all stored properties
}
struct Blabla {
var one: String
var two: [Int]
init(three: [String: [Int]]) {
one = ""
two = []
for i in three {
self.one = i.key
self.two = i.value
}
} ERROR! - Return from initializer without initializing all stored properties
}
for in clause may have zero runs, in which case struct properties will not be initialized. You have to provide default values (or emit fatalError if you really need to).
While I think your example is pure synthetical, there is no need to loop through array, you can set properties to its last entry.
The issues is that if three is an empty Dictionary, the instance properties one and two don't get initialised. Also, you are overwriting the properties in each iteration of the for loop and the compiler cannot guarantee that there will be any iterations of the loop in compile-time, hence the compiler error.
You could make the initialiser failable to account for this by checking that the dictionary actually contains at least one key-value pair and assigning that first key-value pair to your properties.
struct Blabla {
var one: String
var two: [Int]
init?(three: [String: [Int]]) {
guard let key = three.keys.first, let value = three[key] else { return nil }
one = key
two = value
}
}
However, you should rethink what it is that you are actually trying to achieve, since with your current setup you have a mismatch between your init input values and the properties of your struct.
This code should compile, but it feels unsafe to me to initialize a Struct in this way because:
It assume your dictionary has values in it.
Your stored properties will always have the last value you looped through.
In order to pull values out to satisfy the compiler you need to force unwrap them. (With Dávid Pásztor's guard-letting approach, this can be avoided)
struct Blabla {
var one: String
var two: [Int]
init(three: [String: [Int]]) {
self.one = three.keys.first!
self.two = three[three.keys.first!]!
}
}
let input = ["pizza": [1,2]]
let l = Blabla(three: input)
If I were you I would let the memberwise initializer that you get for free do its thing and provide either a specialized initializer to handle your case of taking a Dictionary as input or move that parsing to another function/class/etc....
The compiler error is clear: If the dictionary is empty the struct members are never initialized. But the code makes no sense anyway as each iteration of the dictionary overwrites the values.
Maybe you mean to map the dictionary to an array of the struct
struct Blabla {
let one: String
let two: [Int]
}
let three = ["A":[1,2], "B":[3,4]]
let blabla = three.map{Blabla(one: $0.key, two: $0.value)}
print(blabla) // [Blabla(one: "A", two: [1, 2]), Blabla(one: "B", two: [3, 4])]
struct blabla{
var a : string
var b : [int] = []
init(_ data: [string:[int]]){
// whatever you want to do
}
}
Related
I am attempting to get the values from an NSSet in core data and append those values to an array of type String.
func addStepsToArray() {
if let steps = entity.steps {
for i in steps {
recipeStep.append(String(i))
}
}
}
entity.steps is the list of steps tied to a core data entity. This is an NSSet. I am trying to copy those values to an array of type String.
#State var recipeStep: [String]
When trying to do this in my for in loop, I receive the following error: No exact matches in call to initializer
If I remove the conversion of "I" to String, I receive the following error:
Cannot convert value of type NSSet.Element (aka Any) to expected argument type String
Any idea on how to get this to work?
NSSet is defined in Objective C, which didn't have generics. It's an untyped collection, so you don't statically know anything about its elements.
As you've noticed, your i variable isn't a String, it's an Any.
You're confusing type coercion ("casting") with type conversion. If i were a Double, you could call String(i) to invoke an initializer which takes a double, and processes into a String.
You tried something similar by calling String(i), where you're making the Swift compiler find an initializer on String with the signitiure init(_: Any).
There is no such initializer. And besides, that's not what you want. You don't want to create a new String from a different kind of value. You already have a string, it's just "hidden" behind an Any reference.
What you're looking for is to do a down-cast, from Any to String:
func addStepsToArray() {
if let steps = entity.steps {
for i in steps {
guard let step = i as? String else {
fatalError("Decide what to do if the value isn't a String.")
}
recipeStep.append(i as String)
}
}
}
I'll warn you though, there are several issues/blemishes with this code:
You're using a for loop to do what is ultimately just a mapping operation
Your computation doesn't return its ouput, and instead indirectly achieves its goal through a side-effect on recipeStep
Your computation doesn't take a its input as a parameter, and instead indirectly achieves its goal through a side-effect on entity
i is conventionally expected to be an integer index of a for loop iterating over a sequence of numbers. Here it's an Any (a String at runtime)
Here's what I would suggest instead:
func getRecipeSteps(from entity: MyEntityType) -> [String] {
guard let steps = entity.steps else { return [] }
return steps.map { step in
guard let stringStep = step as? String else {
fatalError("Decide what to do if the value isn't a String.")
}
return step
}
}
Then in the rest of your code (and your tests), you can write self.recipeSteps = getRecipeSteps(from: myEntity). Elegant!
If you're certain that these entity.steps values can only ever be strings, then you can boil this down to a single map with a force-cast:
func getRecipeSteps(from entity: MyEntityType) -> [String] {
entity.steps?.map { $0 as! String } ?? []
}
Just convert directly:
let set = Set(["1", "2", "3"])
let array = Array(set)
DDLog(set)//Set<String>)
DDLog(array)//[String]
Consider the following code:
struct Card {
var name0: String
var name1: String
}
var cards = [Card]()
cards.append(Card(name0: "hello", name1: "world"))
// Need to perform array index access,
// every time I want to mutate a struct property :(
cards[0].name0 = "good"
cards[0].name1 = "bye"
// ...
// ...
// "good bye"
print(cards[0].name0 + " " + cards[0].name1)
Instead of having to perform multiple array index accessing every time I want to mutate a property in struct, is there a technique to avoid such repeating array index accessing operation?
// Ok. This is an invalid Swift statement.
var referenceToCardStruct = &(cards[0])
referenceToCardStruct.name0 = "good"
referenceToCardStruct.name1 = "bye"
// ...
// ...
There are a lot of good answers here, and you should not think of value types as "a limitation." The behavior of value types is very intentional and is an important feature. Generally, I'd recommend inout for this problem, like matt suggests.
But it is also certainly possible to get the syntax you're describing. You just need a computed variable (which can be a local variable).
let index = 0 // Just to show it can be externally configurable
var referenceToCardStruct: Card {
get { cards[index] }
set { cards[index] = newValue }
}
referenceToCardStruct.name0 = "good"
referenceToCardStruct.name1 = "bye"
print(cards[0].name0 + " " + cards[0].name1)
struct Card {
var name0: String
var name1: String
}
var cards = [Card]()
// every time I want to mutate a struct property :(
cards[0].name0 = "good"
cards[0].name1 = "bye"
Instead of having to perform multiple array index accessing every time I want to mutate a property in struct, is there a technique to avoid such repeating array index accessing operation?
No. When you have an array of struct, then in order to make a change to a struct within the array, you must refer to that struct by index.
If you don't want to see the repeated use of the index, you can hide it in a function using inout:
func mutate(card: inout Card) {
card.name0 = "good"
card.name1 = "bye"
}
for index in cards.indices {
mutate(card:&cards[index])
}
Some day, Swift may include for inout which will allow you to cycle through an array of struct and mutate each struct instance directly. But that day is not yet here.
In answer to the implied question whether it is worth switching to a class just to avoid this repeated use of the index, my answer would be No. There is a good reason for using structs — they are much easier to reason about than classes, and are one of Swift's best features — and I would keep using them if that reason matters to you.
struct is a value type you can't get a reference to it's object with assignment , you should go that way , use a mutating method like https://stackoverflow.com/a/52497495/5820010 or use a class instead
If you don't want to repeat the index, then create a variable from the value you want.
var cards = [Card]()
cards.append(Card(name0: "hello", name1: "world"))
var card = cards[0]
card.name0 = "good"
card.name1 = "bye"
// ...
// ...
cards[0] = card // update the array with the updated card
// "good bye"
print(card.name0 + " " + card.name1)
I think the mutating method is the way to go, as Sh_Khan points out.
In your case, I would do something like:
1> struct Card {
2. var name0: String
3. var name1: String
4. }
5.
6. var cards = [Card]()
7. cards.append(Card(name0: "hello", name1: "world"))
cards: [Card] = 1 value {
[0] = {
name0 = "hello"
name1 = "world"
}
}
8> extension Card {
9. mutating func setNames(name0: String, name1: String) {
10. self.name0 = name0
11. self.name1 = name1
12. }
13. }
14> cards[0].setNames(name0: "x", name1: "y")
15> cards
$R0: [Card] = 1 value {
[0] = {
name0 = "x"
name1 = "y"
}
}
Another approach is a wholesale update of cards[0].
Kind of makes you wish for record updating syntax (a la Haskell or Elm) or dictionary merging-type functionality. But look on the bright side. Maybe Swift's lack of making this easy is testament to the fact that it has static-typing-and-value-semantics-while-allowing-mutation and that combination of features, I think, makes the mutating func or full array element update all but required. I'm not sure Swift has a syntactic feature for updating multiple properties in one shot (without writing your own function or method).
In my model, I have some arrays:
var thisArray = [Object]
var thatArray = [Object]
var anotherArray = [Object]
In my view controller, I want to switch on a value to determine which array I will append to:
var whichArray: [Object]!
switch someValue {
case .thisArray: whichArray = thisArray
case .thatArray: whichArray = thatArray // "He went thatArray!"
case .anotherArray: whichArray = anotherArray
}
whichArray.append(object)
But of course this won't work because Array is a value type.
Is there a way to do this? Of course I could do the following:
switch someValue {
case .thisArray: thisArray.append(object)
case .thatArray: thatArray.append(object)
case .anotherArray: anotherArray.append(object)
}
But that is so inelegant and redundant! And if there's other more complex things going on in the surrounding code, then it's especially so.
Is there a solution here? Is it possible to create a reference to a value type?
PS. Even better, though really its own question, is if I could use the name of the case (e.g., "thisArray" for someValue = .thisArray) to set the array, by name (i.e., avoid the whole switch statement and just say objectName.append(object) or something like that) but as far as I know this isn't a thing. Or maybe this IS possible? And maybe it's my birthday?
Since Arrays are value types - as you have said yourself - they can't be passed around (or assigned) as a reference. One solution would be to create a wrapper class for the Array which itself would then be a reference type. You can then assign this wrapper class instead of the arrays themselves.
Now, given that you also said you might prefer to access the Arrays by the name and completely get rid of the switch you could change your design to storing thisArray, thatArray and anotherArray in a Dictionary, with the keys being the different values for someValue.
This way you could simply append to the desired array with:
arrayDict[someValue]?.append(object)
(Given that you've properly set up the dictionary beforehand)
Like this for example:
enum Value {
case thisArray
case thatArray
case anotherArray
}
var arrayDict = [
Value.thisArray : [String](),
Value.thatArray : [String](),
Value.anotherArray : [String]()
]
arrayDict[.thatArray]?.append("Some String.")
For the sake of creating a short working example I've replaced Object with String but that obviously doesn't matter.
I would typically recommend solving this with closures. It's more powerful and safer. For example:
let append: (Object) -> Void
switch someValue {
case .thisArray: append = { thisArray.append($0) }
case .thatArray: append = { thatArray.append($0) }
case .anotherArray: append = { anotherArray.append($0) }
}
append(object)
(It would be ideal here to just say append = thisArray.append, but you can't do that in Swift today. It's a "partial application of a mutating function" and that's not currently legal.)
Even though Swift was designed to reduce pointer operations, pointers are still available:
var thisArray = [1,2,3]
var thatArray = [4,5,6]
var anotherArray = [7,8,9]
var ptr: UnsafeMutablePointer<[Int]>
let someValue = 2
switch someValue {
case 1: ptr = UnsafeMutablePointer(&thisArray)
case 2: ptr = UnsafeMutablePointer(&thatArray)
default: ptr = UnsafeMutablePointer(&anotherArray)
}
ptr.pointee.append(42)
print(thatArray) // [4,5,6,42]
A minor annoyance with this is that you have to call ptr.pointee to access the target array. If you assign the pointee to another variable (i.e. let whichArray = ptr.pointee), any modification to whichArray won't be reflected in the original array.
(I had to change your Object type to Int so that it runs in the IBM Swift Sandbox)
What is wrong here and how to solve this problem?
struct Venue {
let building: String
var rooms: [String]?
}
func addRoom(building: String, room: String) {
if let venueIndex = find(venues.map {$0.building}, building) {
venues[venueIndex].rooms.append(room) //Cannot invoke 'append' with an argument list of type'(String)'
}
}
var venues: [Venue] = [...]
The problem is that venues[venueIndex].rooms is not a [String] but a [String]?. Optionals don’t have an append method – the value wrapped inside them might, but they don’t.
You could use optional chaining to do the append in the case where it isn’t nil:
venues[venueIndex].rooms?.append(room)
But you may instead want to initialize rooms to an empty index instead when it is nil, in which case you need to do a slightly messier assignment rather than an append:
venues[venueIndex].rooms = (venues[venueIndex].rooms ?? []) + [room]
However, it is worth asking yourself, does rooms really need to be optional? Or could it just be a non-optional array with a starting value of empty? If so, this will likely simplify much of your code.
I want to check if there is a value in a array and if so assign to a String using a if-left statement:
if let scoreValue = scoreValueArray[element!]{
// do something with scoreValue
}
Error: Bound value in a conditional binding must be of optional type
So tried changing the ! to ? but error persists.
Any input appreciated.
scoreValueArray is an array of strings, where a String value is appended to array if a condition is met, then array is saved to NSUserdefaults.
So element is a int which corresponds to a index in the array, bt only if the index is occupied with a String, so
scoreValueArray[element!]
could return an 'Index out of bounds', hence want to use the if-let.
Although the accepted answer clearly puts why optional binding is not available in the current implementation, it doesn't provide with a solution.
As it is shown in this answer, protocols provide an elegant way of safely checking the bounds of an array. Here's the Swift 2.0 version:
extension Array {
subscript (safe index: Int) -> Element? {
return indices ~= index ? self[index] : nil
}
}
Which you can use like this:
let fruits = ["Apple", "Banana", "Cherry"]
if let fruit = fruits[safe: 4] {
// Do something with the fruit
}
It's not clear what type your scoreValueArray is, but for the sake of this answer, I'm going to assume it's an array of Int.
var scoreValueArray: Array<Int>
Now, if we look the definition of the Array struct, we'll find this:
struct Array<T> : MutableCollectionType, Sliceable {
// other stuff...
subscript (index: Int) -> T
// more stuff
}
So, calling the subscript method on our array (which is what we do when we say scoreValueArray) returns a non-optional. And non-optionals cannot be used in the conditional binding if let/if var statements.
We can duplicate this error message in a more simple example:
let foo: Int = 3
if let bar = foo {
// same error
}
This produces the same error. If we instead do something more like the following, we can avoid the error:
let foo: Int? = 3
if let bar = foo {
// perfectly valid
}
This is different from a dictionary, whose subscript method does return an optional (T?). A dictionary will return a value if the key passed in the subscript is found or nil if there is no value for the passed key.
We must avoid array-index-out-of-bounds exceptions in the same way we always do... by checking the array's length:
if element < scoreValueArray.count {
scoreValue = scoreValueArray[element]
}