I have a class for that I want to write unit test. This class has a dependency, which is a generic class, that I want to mock.
This is the class I want to test.
class ClassToTest: SomeProtocol {
private let dependency = DependencyClass<AnotherClass>()
init() {
//Some Code Here
}
}
class DependencyClass<General: AnotherClassProtocol> {
func getData(from general: General) -> AnyPublisher<Data, Error> {
//Some Code Here
}
}
What I tried
class ClassToTest: SomeProtocol {
private let dependency: DependencyClassProtocol
init(_ dependency: DependencyClassProtocol = DependencyClass<AnotherClass>()) {
//Some Code Here
self. dependency = dependency
}
}
class DependencyClass<General: AnotherClassProtocol>: DependencyClassProtocol {
func getData(from general: General) -> AnyPublisher<Data, Error> {
//Some Code Here
}
}
protocol DependencyClassProtocol {
associatedtype General
func getData(from general: General) -> AnyPublisher<Data, Error>
}
This approach gives me error "Protocol can an only be used as a generic constraint because it has Self or associated type requirements".
How can I Mock the DependencyClass to test the exact behaviour of ClassToTest.
I am new to Swift, but I have plenty of experience in other languages like Java, Kotlin, Javascript, etc. It's possible that what I want to do is not supported by the language, and I've poured over the Swift Language Guide looking for the answer.
I want to implement the decorator pattern, using generics. I easily did this in Kotlin, and I'm porting the library to Swift.
class Result<T> {
let result: T?
let error: NSError?
init(result: T?, error: NSError?) {
self.result = result
self.error = error
}
}
protocol DoSomething {
associatedtype T
func doSomething() -> Result<T>
}
protocol StoreSomething {
associatedtype T
func storeSomething(thing: Result<T>)
}
/*
* DOES NOT COMPILE
*/
class StoringSomething<T> {
private let delegate: DoSomething
private let store: StoreSomething
init(delegate: DoSomething, store: StoreSomething) {
self.delegate = delegate
self.store = store
}
func doSomething() -> Result<T> {
let result = delegate.doSomething()
store.storeSomething(thing: result)
return result
}
}
I get a Protocol 'DoSomething' can only be used as a generic constraint because it has Self or associated type requirements error from the compiler. I've tried using a typealias and other ideas from SO and the Swift manual.
Thanks to #Sweeper's suggestion on associatedtype erasure you can implement the Decorator pattern with generics like so:
class AnyDoSomething<T>: DoSomething {
func doSomething() -> Result<T> {
fatalError("Must implement")
}
}
class AnyStoreSomething<T>: StoreSomething {
func storeSomething(thing: Result<T>) {
fatalError("Must implement")
}
}
class StoringSomething<T>: DoSomething {
private let delegate: AnyDoSomething<T>
private let store: AnyStoreSomething<T>
init(delegate: AnyDoSomething<T>, store: AnyStoreSomething<T>) {
self.delegate = delegate
self.store = store
}
func doSomething() -> Result<T> {
let result = delegate.doSomething()
store.storeSomething(thing: result)
return result
}
}
class DoSomethingNice<T>: AnyDoSomething<T> {
override func doSomething() -> Result<T> {
}
}
Consider the following example:
class ManObj {
func baseFunc() {
print("ManObj baseFunc")
}
}
class SubObj: ManObj {
}
protocol Model {
}
extension Model { // This is protocol extension
func someFunc() { // Protocol extension default implementation
(self as! ManObj).baseFunc()
print("Model implementation")
}
}
extension SubObj: Model {
func someFunc() {
print("SubObj Implementation")
}
}
let list = SubObj()
list.someFunc() // static dispatching
let list2: Model = SubObj()
list2.someFunc() // dynamic dispatching
The output is nicely:
SubObj Implementation
ManObj baseFunc
Model implementation
But I dislike the casting in the line (self as! ManObj).baseFunc().
In fact, I only plan to apply Model protocol to subclasses of ManObj. (But not all subclasses of ManObj are Model though!) So, I tried to change Model to:
extension Model where Self: ManObj {
func someFunc() {
self.baseFunc() // No more casting needed!
print("Model implementation")
}
}
But I'm greeted with error:
list2.someFunc() <- error: 'Model' is not a subtype of 'ManObj'
So, is there a way for me to trigger Model.someFunc from list2 after I constrain Model to where Self: ManObj?
Create an empty class just for type casting
class ManObj {
func baseFunc() {
print("ManObj baseFunc")
}
}
class SubObj: ModelCaster {
func someFunc() {
print("SubObj Implementation")
}
}
protocol Model {
}
extension Model where Self: ModelCaster { // This is protocol extension
func someFunc() { // Protocol extension default implementation
print("Model implementation")
}
}
class ModelCaster: ManObj, Model{
}
let list = SubObj()
list.someFunc() //SubObj Implementation
let list2: ModelCaster = SubObj()
list2.someFunc() //Model implementation
Why doesn't this work:
protocol Work {
init()
static func make() -> Self
}
extension Work {
static func make() -> Self {
return self.init()
}
}
class Foo : Work {
required init() {}
}
I can make inheritance possible by adding the factory to the object itself:
class Foo : Work {
required init() {}
static func make() -> Self {
return self.init()
}
}
I could also use a non-class or mark the class final, but I'd prefer/am required to use inheritance.
Is it possible to implement a default factory on a protocol so that an inheritable type can conform without implementing it again.
If you want a factory that will initialize objects adhering to a protocol, you should use the always awesome generics!
E.g.
protocol Work {
init()
static func make<T: Work>(type: T.Type) -> T
}
extension Work {
static func make<T: Work>(type: T.Type) -> T {
return T.init()
}
static func make() -> Self {
return make(Self)
}
}
class Foo : Work {
required init() {}
}
Is there a standard way to make a "pure virtual function" in Swift, ie. one that must be overridden by every subclass, and which, if it is not, causes a compile time error?
You have two options:
1. Use a Protocol
Define the superclass as a Protocol instead of a Class
Pro: Compile time check for if each "subclass" (not an actual subclass) implements the required method(s)
Con: The "superclass" (protocol) cannot implement methods or properties
2. Assert in the super version of the method
Example:
class SuperClass {
func someFunc() {
fatalError("Must Override")
}
}
class Subclass : SuperClass {
override func someFunc() {
}
}
Pro: Can implement methods and properties in superclass
Con: No compile time check
The following allows to inherit from a class and also to have the protocol's compile time check :)
protocol ViewControllerProtocol {
func setupViews()
func setupConstraints()
}
typealias ViewController = ViewControllerClass & ViewControllerProtocol
class ViewControllerClass : UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
self.setup()
}
func setup() {
guard let controller = self as? ViewController else {
return
}
controller.setupViews()
controller.setupConstraints()
}
//.... and implement methods related to UIViewController at will
}
class SubClass : ViewController {
//-- in case these aren't here... an error will be presented
func setupViews() { ... }
func setupConstraints() { ... }
}
There isn't any support for abstract class/ virtual functions, but you could probably use a protocol for most cases:
protocol SomeProtocol {
func someMethod()
}
class SomeClass: SomeProtocol {
func someMethod() {}
}
If SomeClass doesn't implement someMethod, you'll get this compile time error:
error: type 'SomeClass' does not conform to protocol 'SomeProtocol'
Another workaround, if you don't have too many "virtual" methods, is to have the subclass pass the "implementations" into the base class constructor as function objects:
class MyVirtual {
// 'Implementation' provided by subclass
let fooImpl: (() -> String)
// Delegates to 'implementation' provided by subclass
func foo() -> String {
return fooImpl()
}
init(fooImpl: (() -> String)) {
self.fooImpl = fooImpl
}
}
class MyImpl: MyVirtual {
// 'Implementation' for super.foo()
func myFoo() -> String {
return "I am foo"
}
init() {
// pass the 'implementation' to the superclass
super.init(myFoo)
}
}
You can use protocol vs assertion as suggested in answer here by drewag.
However, example for the protocol is missing. I am covering here,
Protocol
protocol SomeProtocol {
func someMethod()
}
class SomeClass: SomeProtocol {
func someMethod() {}
}
Now every subclasses are required to implement the protocol which is checked in compile time. If SomeClass doesn't implement someMethod, you'll get this compile time error:
error: type 'SomeClass' does not conform to protocol 'SomeProtocol'
Note: this only works for the topmost class that implements the protocol. Any subclasses can blithely ignore the protocol requirements. – as commented by memmons
Assertion
class SuperClass {
func someFunc() {
fatalError("Must Override")
}
}
class Subclass : SuperClass {
override func someFunc() {
}
}
However, assertion will work only in runtime.
This is what I usually do, to causes the compile-time error :
class SuperClass {}
protocol SuperClassProtocol {
func someFunc()
}
typealias SuperClassType = SuperClass & SuperClassProtocol
class Subclass: SuperClassType {
func someFunc() {
// ...
}
}
You can achieve it by passing function into initializer.
For example
open class SuperClass {
private let abstractFunction: () -> Void
public init(abstractFunction: #escaping () -> Void) {
self.abstractFunction = abstractFunction
}
public func foo() {
// ...
abstractFunction()
}
}
public class SubClass: SuperClass {
public init() {
super.init(
abstractFunction: {
print("my implementation")
}
)
}
}
You can extend it by passing self as the parameter:
open class SuperClass {
private let abstractFunction: (SuperClass) -> Void
public init(abstractFunction: #escaping (SuperClass) -> Void) {
self.abstractFunction = abstractFunction
}
public func foo() {
// ...
abstractFunction(self)
}
}
public class SubClass: SuperClass {
public init() {
super.init(
abstractFunction: {
(_self: SuperClass) in
let _self: SubClass = _self as! SubClass
print("my implementation")
}
)
}
}
Pro:
Compile time check for if each subclassimplements the required method(s)
Can implement methods and properties in superclass
Note that you can't pass self to the function so you won't get memory leak.
Con:
It's not the prettiest code
You can't use it for the classes with required init
Being new to iOS development, I'm not entirely sure when this was implemented, but one way to get the best of both worlds is to implement an extension for a protocol:
protocol ThingsToDo {
func doThingOne()
}
extension ThingsToDo {
func doThingTwo() { /* Define code here */}
}
class Person: ThingsToDo {
func doThingOne() {
// Already defined in extension
doThingTwo()
// Rest of code
}
}
The extension is what allows you to have the default value for a function while the function in the regular protocol still provides a compile time error if not defined