How could I make my code wait until the task in DispatchQueue finishes? Does it need any CompletionHandler or something?
func myFunction() {
var a: Int?
DispatchQueue.main.async {
var b: Int = 3
a = b
}
// wait until the task finishes, then print
print(a) // - this will contain nil, of course, because it
// will execute before the code above
}
I'm using Xcode 8.2 and writing in Swift 3.
If you need to hide the asynchronous nature of myFunction from the caller, use DispatchGroups to achieve this. Otherwise, use a completion block. Find samples for both below.
DispatchGroup Sample
You can either get notified when the group's enter() and leave() calls are balanced:
func myFunction() {
var a = 0
let group = DispatchGroup()
group.enter()
DispatchQueue.main.async {
a = 1
group.leave()
}
// does not wait. But the code in notify() is executed
// after enter() and leave() calls are balanced
group.notify(queue: .main) {
print(a)
}
}
or you can wait:
func myFunction() {
var a = 0
let group = DispatchGroup()
group.enter()
// avoid deadlocks by not using .main queue here
DispatchQueue.global(qos: .default).async {
a = 1
group.leave()
}
// wait ...
group.wait()
print(a) // you could also `return a` here
}
Note: group.wait() blocks the current queue (probably the main queue in your case), so you have to dispatch.async on another queue (like in the above sample code) to avoid a deadlock.
Completion Block Sample
func myFunction(completion: #escaping (Int)->()) {
var a = 0
DispatchQueue.main.async {
let b: Int = 1
a = b
completion(a) // call completion after you have the result
}
}
// on caller side:
myFunction { result in
print("result: \(result)")
}
In Swift 3, there is no need for completion handler when DispatchQueue finishes one task.
Furthermore you can achieve your goal in different ways
One way is this:
var a: Int?
let queue = DispatchQueue(label: "com.app.queue")
queue.sync {
for i in 0..<10 {
print("Ⓜ️" , i)
a = i
}
}
print("After Queue \(a)")
It will wait until the loop finishes but in this case your main thread will block.
You can also do the same thing like this:
let myGroup = DispatchGroup()
myGroup.enter()
//// Do your task
myGroup.leave() //// When your task completes
myGroup.notify(queue: DispatchQueue.main) {
////// do your remaining work
}
One last thing: If you want to use completionHandler when your task completes using DispatchQueue, you can use DispatchWorkItem.
Here is an example how to use DispatchWorkItem:
let workItem = DispatchWorkItem {
// Do something
}
let queue = DispatchQueue.global()
queue.async {
workItem.perform()
}
workItem.notify(queue: DispatchQueue.main) {
// Here you can notify you Main thread
}
Swift 5 version of the solution
func myCriticalFunction() {
var value1: String?
var value2: String?
let group = DispatchGroup()
group.enter()
//async operation 1
DispatchQueue.global(qos: .default).async {
// Network calls or some other async task
value1 = //out of async task
group.leave()
}
group.enter()
//async operation 2
DispatchQueue.global(qos: .default).async {
// Network calls or some other async task
value2 = //out of async task
group.leave()
}
group.wait()
print("Value1 \(value1) , Value2 \(value2)")
}
Use dispatch group
dispatchGroup.enter()
FirstOperation(completion: { _ in
dispatchGroup.leave()
})
dispatchGroup.enter()
SecondOperation(completion: { _ in
dispatchGroup.leave()
})
dispatchGroup.wait() // Waits here on this thread until the two operations complete executing.
In Swift 5.5+ you can take advantage of Swift Concurrency which allows to return a value from a closure dispatched to the main thread
func myFunction() async {
var a : Int?
a = await MainActor.run {
let b = 3
return b
}
print(a)
}
Task {
await myFunction()
}
Swift 4
You can use Async Function for these situations. When you use DispatchGroup(),Sometimes deadlock may be occures.
var a: Int?
#objc func myFunction(completion:#escaping (Bool) -> () ) {
DispatchQueue.main.async {
let b: Int = 3
a = b
completion(true)
}
}
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
myFunction { (status) in
if status {
print(self.a!)
}
}
}
Somehow the dispatchGroup enter() and leave() commands above didn't work for my case.
Using sleep(5) in a while loop on the background thread worked for me though. Leaving here in case it helps someone else and it didn't interfere with my other threads.
Related
Found this issue while working with the new Swift concurrency tools.
Here's the setup:
class FailedDeinit {
init() {
print(#function, id)
task = Task {
await subscribe()
}
}
deinit {
print(#function, id)
}
func subscribe() async {
let stream = AsyncStream<Double> { _ in }
for await p in stream {
print("\(p)")
}
}
private var task: Task<(), Swift.Error>?
let id = UUID()
}
var instance: FailedDeinit? = FailedDeinit()
instance = nil
Running this code in a Playground yields this:
init() F007863C-9187-4591-A4F4-BC6BC990A935
!!! The deinit method is never called!!!
Strangely, when I change the code to this:
class SuccessDeinit {
init() {
print(#function, id)
task = Task {
let stream = AsyncStream<Double> { _ in }
for await p in stream {
print("\(p)")
}
}
}
deinit {
print(#function, id)
}
private var task: Task<(), Swift.Error>?
let id = UUID()
}
var instance: SuccessDeinit? = SuccessDeinit()
instance = nil
By moving the code from the method subscribe() directly in the Task, the result in the console changes to this:
init() 0C455201-89AE-4D7A-90F8-D6B2D93493B1
deinit 0C455201-89AE-4D7A-90F8-D6B2D93493B1
This may be a bug or not but there is definitely something that I do not understand. I would welcome any insight about that.
~!~!~!~!
This is crazy (or maybe I am?) but with a SwiftUI macOS project. I still DON'T get the same behaviour as you. Look at that code where I kept the same definition of the FailedDeinit and SuccessDeinit classes but used them within a SwiftUI view.
struct ContentView: View {
#State private var failed: FailedDeinit?
#State private var success: SuccessDeinit?
var body: some View {
VStack {
HStack {
Button("Add failed") { failed = .init() }
Button("Remove failed") { failed = nil }
}
HStack {
Button("Add Success") { success = .init() }
Button("Remove Success") { success = nil }
}
}
}
}
class FailedDeinit {
init() {
print(#function, id)
task = Task { [weak self] in
await self?.subscribe()
}
}
deinit {
print(#function, id)
}
func subscribe() async {
let stream = AsyncStream<Double> { _ in }
for await p in stream {
print("\(p)")
}
}
private var task: Task<(), Swift.Error>?
let id = UUID()
}
Consider the following:
task = Task {
await subscribe()
}
It is true that introduces a strong reference to self. You can resolve that strong reference with:
task = Task { [weak self] in
await self?.subscribe()
}
But that is only part of the problem here. This [weak self] pattern only helps us in this case if either the Task has not yet started or if it has finished.
The issue is that as soon as subscribe starts executing, despite the weak reference in the closure, it will keep a strong reference to self until subscribe finishes. So, this weak reference is prudent, but it is not the whole story.
The issue here is more subtle than appears at first glance. Consider the following:
func subscribe() async {
let stream = AsyncStream<Double> { _ in }
for await p in stream {
print("\(p)")
}
}
The subscribe method will keep executing until the stream calls finish. But you never finish the stream. (You don’t yield any values, either. Lol.) Anyway, without anything in the AsyncStream, once subscribe starts it will never complete and thus will never release self.
So let us consider your second rendition, when you create the Task, bypassing subscribe:
task = Task {
let stream = AsyncStream<Double> { _ in }
for await p in stream {
print("\(p)")
}
}
Yes, you will see the object be deallocated, but you are neglecting to notice that this Task will never finish, either! So, do not be lulled into into a false sense of security just because the containing object was released: The Task never finishes! The memory associated with that Task will never get released (even if the parent object, FailedDeinit in your example, is).
This all can be illustrated by changing your stream to actually yield values and eventually finish:
task = Task {
let stream = AsyncStream<Double> { continuation in
Task {
for i in 0 ..< 10 {
try await Task.sleep(nanoseconds: 1 * NSEC_PER_SECOND)
continuation.yield(Double(i))
}
continuation.finish()
}
}
for await p in stream {
print("\(p)")
}
print("all done")
}
In this case, if you dismiss it while the stream is underway, you will see that the AsyncStream continues until it finishes. (And, if you happen to be doing this inside a method, the object in question will also be retained until the task is canceled.)
So, what you need to do is to cancel the Task if you want the AsyncStream to finish. And you also should implement onTermination of the continuation in such a manner that it stops the asynchronous stream.
But, the result is that if I cancel this when the view controller (or whatever) is released, then my example yielding values 0 through 9 will stop and the task will be freed.
It all comes down to what your AsyncStream is really doing. But in the process of simplifying the MCVE and removing the contents of the AsyncStream, you simultaneously do not handle cancelation and never call finish. Those two, combined, manifest the problem you describe.
This doesn't really have anything to do with async/await or AsyncStream. It's a perfectly normal retain cycle. You (the FailedDeinit instance) are retaining the task, but the task refers to subscribe which is a method of you, i.e. self, so the task is retaining you. So simply break the retain cycle just like you would break any other retain cycle. Just change
task = Task {
await subscribe()
}
To
task = Task { [weak self] in
await self?.subscribe()
}
Also, be sure to test in a real project, not a playground, as playgrounds are not indicative of anything in this regard. Here's the code I used:
import UIKit
class FailedDeinit {
init() {
print(#function, id)
task = Task { [weak self] in
await self?.subscribe()
}
}
deinit {
print(#function, id)
}
func subscribe() async {
let stream = AsyncStream<Double> { _ in }
for await p in stream {
print("\(p)")
}
}
private var task: Task<(), Swift.Error>?
let id = UUID()
}
class ViewController: UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
var instance: FailedDeinit? = FailedDeinit()
instance = nil
}
}
I am experimenting with Swift async-await and AsyncSequence protocol,
Here is the code:
struct AsyncNumbers<Element: Numeric>: AsyncSequence {
private let numbers: [Element]
init(_ numbers: [Element]) {
self.numbers = numbers
}
func makeAsyncIterator() -> AsyncNumberIterator {
return AsyncNumberIterator(numbers)
}
}
extension AsyncNumbers {
struct AsyncNumberIterator: AsyncIteratorProtocol {
private let numbers: [Element]
private var index = -1
init(_ numbers: [Element]) {
self.numbers = numbers
}
mutating func next() async -> AsyncNumbers<Element>.Element? {
index += 1
return await withCheckedContinuation { [self] continuation in
Timer.scheduledTimer(withTimeInterval: 2, repeats: false) { timer in
guard index < numbers.count else {
continuation.resume(returning: nil)
timer.invalidate()
return
}
continuation.resume(returning: numbers[index])
}
}
}
}
}
func printNumbers() async {
let numbers = AsyncNumbers([5,78,3,45,99,100,23,4,7,8,9])
for await num in numbers {
print("Number:", num)
}
print("End")
}
Task {
await printNumbers()
}
This code fails before even the first number is printed to the console, with error SWIFT TASK CONTINUATION MISUSE: next() leaked its continuation!,
I don't understand why I am getting this error here, the timer block is called only once after 2 seconds no duplicate calls to the continuation block are happening here,
Does anyone know what might the issue?
Thank you in advance :)
As several rightly commented, the problem is your use of Timer and Concurrency.
Timer.scheduledTimer requires a runloop to work. In contrast to the main thread, secondary threads do not have a runloop until you explicitly create it.
Since you are calling this from a coroutine in the body of an await function, your thread context is a secondary thread. This means that at the time of you calling Timer.scheduledTimer you are not having a runloop, hence the timer callback will never be called and – depending on the context of the surrounding code – Swift rightly warns you that you are leaking the coroutine.
I need to do some methods one by one without interrupting, in a separate thread, that way I have in my class
fileprivate var queue = DispatchQueue(label: "ProgressHUD", qos: .userInteractive)
and when I need show/hide I do some like this
queue.sync {
__hide()
}
or
queue.sync {
__show()
}
in this __%%() methods, I need to do some actions with UI in the main thread, and I need to do all action from --show/--hide one by one without interrupting. So in inner, I use
private func __show()
{
let g = DispatchGroup()
g.enter()
DispatchQueue.main.async {
print("go?")
self.doMyAction1()
self.doMyAction2()
self.doMyAction3()
g.leave()
}
g.wait()
}
but the app always freezes on line g.wait() and doesn't call main.async and doesn't print go?. What I do wrong!?
func dispatchGroup() -> String {
var message = ""
let group = DispatchGroup()
group.enter()
DispatchQueue.global(qos: .background).asyncAfter(deadline: .now() + 5) {
message = "Hiii Friends"
group.leave()
}
group.wait()
return message
}
I am chaining some functions together and I can't figure out how to call a completion handler with a return value once all the functions are done running.
class AirQualityProvider {
var aBlock: ((Int?) -> Void)?
func getAirQuality(completion: #escaping (Int?) -> Void) {
aBlock = completion
callAPI()
}
private func callAPI() {
let data = Data()
parseDataForAQI(data: data)
}
private func parseDataForAQI(data: Data) {
for d in data {
dosomeMath(d)
}
}
private func dosomeMath(data: Int) {
// HERE IS WHERE I WANT IT TO SUM UP ALL THE NUMBERS
THEN ONLY RETURN ONE VALUE using a completion handler.
Currently, it returns the average as it is being generated.
}
Almost got it working with help to Alexander. The code Alexander supplied works perfectly, it is amazing. The issue is, when I run taskrunner inside alamofire it returns empty. Outside alamofire it works as usual. I need to run this inside alamofire.
func A(json : JSON){
for (key,subJson) in json{
if subJson["free"].doubleValue > 0.0 {
func B(asset: subJson["asset"].stringValue, json: subJson)
}
}
print(taskRunner.getResults())
}
func B(asset : String, json : JSON){
//OUTSIDE ALAMOFIRE WORKS
self.taskRunner.execute{
return 100
}
Alamofire.request(url).responseJSON { response in
//INSIDE ALAMOFIRE DOESN'T WORK. Returns []
self.taskRunner.execute{
return 100
}
}
}
I would use a dispatch queue to synchronize the aggregation of results (by synchronizing Array.append(_:) calls, and the subsequent reading of the array). Here's a simple example:
import Dispatch
import Foundation
class ParallelTaskRunner<Result> {
private var results = [Result]()
private let group = DispatchGroup()
private let resultAggregatorQueue = DispatchQueue(label: "Result Aggregator")
func execute(_ closure: (#escaping (Result) -> Void) -> Void) {
group.enter() // Register that a new task is in-flight
closure { result in
self.resultAggregatorQueue.sync { // Synchronize access to the array
self.results.append(result) // Record the result
}
self.group.leave() // This task is done
}
}
func getResults() -> [Result] {
group.wait() // Make sure all in-flight tasks are done
return resultAggregatorQueue.sync { return results }
}
}
let taskQueue = DispatchQueue(label: "Task Queue", attributes: .concurrent)
let taskRunner = ParallelTaskRunner<Int>()
for i in 0...100 {
taskRunner.execute { completionHandler in
taskQueue.async { // Simulated async computation
let randomTime = 3.0
print("Sleeping for \(randomTime)")
Thread.sleep(forTimeInterval: randomTime) // Simulates intesnive computation
let result = i // Simulate a result
completionHandler(result)
}
}
}
print(taskRunner.getResults()) // Oh look, all the results are here! :D
I have a few unit tests in which I'd like to test if a callback is called on the correct dispatch queue.
In Swift 2, I compared the label of the current queue to my test queue. However in Swift 3 the DISPATCH_CURRENT_QUEUE_LABEL constant no longer exists.
I did find the dispatch_assert_queue function. Which seems to be what I need, but I'm not sure how to call it.
My Swift 2 code:
let testQueueLabel = "com.example.my-test-queue"
let testQueue = dispatch_queue_create(testQueueLabel, nil)
let currentQueueLabel = String(UTF8String: dispatch_queue_get_label(DISPATCH_CURRENT_QUEUE_LABEL))!
XCTAssertEqual(currentQueueLabel, testQueueLabel, "callback should be called on specified queue")
Update:
I got confused by the lack of autocomplete, but it is possible to use __dispatch_assert_queue:
if #available(iOS 10.0, *) {
__dispatch_assert_queue(test1Queue)
}
While this does work for unit tests, it annoyingly stops the whole process with a EXC_BAD_INSTRUCTION instead of only failing a test.
Use dispatchPrecondition(.onQueue(expectedQueue)), the Swift 3 API replacement for the dispatch_assert_queue() C API.
This was covered in the WWDC 2016 GCD session (21:00, Slide 128):
https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2016/720/
Answering my own question:
Based on KFDoom's comments, I'm now using setSpecific and getSpecific.
This creates a key, sets it on the test queue, and later on, gets it again:
let testQueueLabel = "com.example.my-test-queue"
let testQueue = DispatchQueue(label: testQueueLabel, attributes: [])
let testQueueKey = DispatchSpecificKey<Void>()
testQueue.setSpecific(key: testQueueKey, value: ())
// ... later on, to test:
XCTAssertNotNil(DispatchQueue.getSpecific(key: testQueueKey), "callback should be called on specified queue")
Note that there's no value associated with the key (its type is Void), I'm only interested in the existence of the specific, not in it's value.
Important!
Make sure to keep a reference to the key, or cleanup after you're done using it. Otherwise a newly created key could use the same memory address, leading to weird behaviour. See: http://tom.lokhorst.eu/2018/02/leaky-abstractions-in-swift-with-dispatchqueue
Tests based on KFDoom's answer:
import XCTest
import Dispatch
class TestQueue: XCTestCase {
func testWithSpecificKey() {
let queue = DispatchQueue(label: "label")
let key = DispatchSpecificKey<Void>()
queue.setSpecific(key:key, value:())
let expectation1 = expectation(withDescription: "main")
let expectation2 = expectation(withDescription: "queue")
DispatchQueue.main.async {
if (DispatchQueue.getSpecific(key: key) == nil) {
expectation1.fulfill()
}
}
queue.async {
if (DispatchQueue.getSpecific(key: key) != nil) {
expectation2.fulfill()
}
}
waitForExpectations(withTimeout: 1, handler: nil)
}
func testWithPrecondition() {
let queue = DispatchQueue(label: "label")
let expectation1 = expectation(withDescription: "main")
let expectation2 = expectation(withDescription: "queue")
DispatchQueue.main.async {
dispatchPrecondition(condition: .notOnQueue(queue))
expectation1.fulfill()
}
queue.async {
dispatchPrecondition(condition: .onQueue(queue))
expectation2.fulfill()
}
waitForExpectations(withTimeout: 1, handler: nil)
}
}
One option is to set a precondition to test directly for the queue or set "specific" on it and retrieve it later. Further, one could use setSpecific and getSpecific. Alternatively, you can use a precondition check if you're on a queue so that should fulfill the "get current" need. src: https://github.com/duemunk/Async/blob/feature/Swift_3.0/AsyncTest/AsyncTests.swift
and
https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/stdlib/public/SDK/Dispatch/Dispatch.swift
One related option is to set a Main Queue / UI Queue precondition:
dispatchPrecondition(condition: .onQueue(DispatchQueue.main))
/*
Dispatch queue and NSOperations in Swift 3 Xcode 8
*/
protocol Container {
associatedtype ItemType
var count: Int { get }
mutating func pop()
mutating func push(item: ItemType)
mutating func append(item: ItemType)
subscript(i: Int) -> ItemType { get }
}
//Generic Function
struct GenericStack<Element> : Container {
mutating internal func push(item: Element) {
items.append(item)
}
mutating internal func pop() {
items.removeLast()
}
var items = [ItemType]()
internal subscript(i: Int) -> Element {
return items[i]
}
mutating internal func append(item: Element) {
self.push(item: item)
}
internal var count: Int { return items.count }
typealias ItemType = Element
}
var myGenericStack = GenericStack<String>()
myGenericStack.append(item: "Narendra")
myGenericStack.append(item: "Bade")
myGenericStack.count
myGenericStack.pop()
myGenericStack.count
//Some NSOperation
class ExploreOperationAndThread {
func performOperation() {
//Create queue
let queue = OperationQueue()
let operation1 = BlockOperation {
var count = myGenericStack.count
while count > 0 {
myGenericStack.pop()
count -= 1
}
}
operation1.completionBlock = {
print("Operation 1")
}
let operation2 = BlockOperation {
var count = 0
while count == 10 {
myGenericStack.append(item: "ItemAdded")
count += 1
}
}
operation2.completionBlock = {
print("Operation 2")
print(myGenericStack.items)
}
//Suppose operation 3 is related to UI
let operation3 = BlockOperation {
//run on main thread
DispatchQueue.main.async {
print(myGenericStack.items.count)
}
}
operation3.completionBlock = {
print("Operation 3")
print(myGenericStack.items.count)
}
//add operation into queue
queue.addOperation(operation3)
queue.addOperation(operation1)
queue.addOperation(operation2)
//Limit number of concurrent operation in queue
queue.maxConcurrentOperationCount = 1
//add dependancies
operation1.addDependency(operation2)
operation2.addDependency(operation3)
if myGenericStack.items.count == 0 {
//remove dependency
operation1.removeDependency(operation2)
}
}
}
//Other ways of using queues
DispatchQueue.global(qos: .userInitiated).async {
ExploreOperationAndThread().performOperation()
}
DispatchQueue.main.async {
print("I am performing operation on main theread asynchronously")
}
OperationQueue.main.addOperation {
var count = 0
while count == 10 {
myGenericStack.append(item: "Narendra")
count += 1
}
}
DispatchQueue.main.asyncAfter(deadline: .now() + 1.5 , execute: {
ExploreOperationAndThread().performOperation()
})
let queue2 = DispatchQueue(label: "queue2") //Default is serial queue
queue2.async {
print("asynchronously")
}