How to copy a "Dictionary" in Swift?
That is, get another object with same keys/values but different memory address.
Furthermore, how to copy an object in Swift?
Thanks,
A 'Dictionary' is actually a Struct in swift, which is a value type. So copying it is as easy as:
let myDictionary = ...
let copyOfMyDictionary = myDictionary
To copy an object (which is a reference type) has a couple of different answers. If the object adopts the NSCopying protocol, then you can just do:
let myObject = ...
let copyOfMyObject = myObject.copy()
If your object doesn't conform to NSCopying then you may not be able to copy the object. Depending on the object's class it may provide it's own method to get a duplicate copy, or if the object has no internal private state then you could create a new object with the same properties.
[Edited to correct a mistake in the previous answer - NSObject (both the Class and the Protocol) does not provide a copy or copyWithZone method and therefore is insufficient for being able to copy an object]
All of the answers given here are great, but they miss a key point regarding warning you about the caveats of copying.
In Swift, you have either value types (struct, enum, tuple, array, dict etc) or reference types (classes).
If you need to copy a class object, then, you have to implement the methods copyWithZone in your class and then call copy on the object.
But if you need to copy a value type object, for eg. an Array, you can copy it directly by just assigning it to a new variable like so:
let myArray = ...
let copyOfMyArray = myArray
But this is only shallow copying.
If your array contains class objects and you want to make their copy as well, then you have to copy each array element individually. This will allow you to make a deep copy.
This is extra information that I thought would add to the info already presented in the well-written answers above.
Object
class Person: NSObject, NSCopying {
var firstName: String
var lastName: String
var age: Int
init(firstName: String, lastName: String, age: Int) {
self.firstName = firstName
self.lastName = lastName
self.age = age
}
func copyWithZone(zone: NSZone) -> AnyObject {
let copy = Person(firstName: firstName, lastName: lastName, age: age)
return copy
}
}
Usage
let paul = Person(firstName: "Paul", lastName: "Hudson", age: 35)
let sophie = paul.copy() as! Person
sophie.firstName = "Sophie"
sophie.age = 5
print("\(paul.firstName) \(paul.lastName) is \(paul.age)")
print("\(sophie.firstName) \(sophie.lastName) is \(sophie.age)")
Source: https://www.hackingwithswift.com/example-code/system/how-to-copy-objects-in-swift-using-copy
Related
I want to know how Literal Convertibles work in Swift. The little I know is that the fact that, in var myInteger = 5, myInteger magically becomes an Int is because Int adopts a protocol, ExpressibleByIntegerLiteral and we don't have to do var myInteger = Int(5). Similarly String, Array, Dictionary etc all conform to some Literal protocols.
My Question is
Am I right in my little understanding of Literal Convertibles?
How can we implement these in our own types. For example
class Employee {
var name: String
var salary: Int
// rest of class functionality ...
}
How can I implement Literal Protocols to do var employee :Employee = "John Doe" which will automatically assign "John Doe" to employee's name property.
You are partially correct in your understanding of the various ExpressibleBy...Literal protocols. When the Swift compiler parses your source code into an Abstract Syntax Tree, it already identified what literal represents what data type: 5 is a literal of type Int, ["name": "John"] is a literal of type Dictionary, etc. Apple makes the base type conform to these protocols for the sake of completeness.
You can adopt these protocols to give your class an opportunity to be initialized from a compile-time constant. But the use case is pretty narrow and I don't see how it applies to your particular situation.
For example, if you want to make your class conform to ExpressibleByStringLiteral, add an initializer to set all your properties from a String:
class Employee: ExpressibleByStringLiteral {
typealias StringLiteralType = String
var name: String
var salary: Int
required init(stringLiteral value: StringLiteralType) {
let components = value.components(separatedBy: "|")
self.name = components[0]
self.salary = Int(components[1])!
}
}
Then you can init your class like this:
let employee1: Employee = "John Smith|50000"
But if you dream about about writing something like this, it's not allowed:
let str = "Jane Doe|60000"
let employee2: Employee = str // error
And if you pass in the wrong data type for salary, it will be a run time error instead of a compile-time error:
let employee3: Employee = "Michael Davis|x" // you won't know this until you run the app
TL, DR: it is a very bad idea to abuse these ExpressibleBy...Literal types.
This can be a scenario to work with Convertibles in custom types.
struct Employee : ExpressibleByStringLiteral {
var name: String = ""
init() {}
init(stringLiteral name: String) {
self.name = name
}
}
func reportName(_ employee: Employee) {
print("Name of employee is \(employee.name)")
}
reportName("John Doe") //Name of employee is John Doe
I was toying in the playground in xcode 7.3.1 with swift. I am a bit confused about the type casting in swift.
So, here is a bit of code that I tried.
class MediaItem {
var name: String
init(name: String) {
self.name = name
}
}
class Movie: MediaItem {
var director: String
init(name: String, director: String) {
self.director = director
super.init(name: name)
}
}
class Song: MediaItem {
var artist: String
init(name: String, artist: String) {
self.artist = artist
super.init(name: name)
}
}
var movieItem = Movie(name: "GOT", director: "RRMartin")
movieItem.dynamicType //Movie.Type
(movieItem as? MediaItem).dynamicType //Optional<MediaItem>.Type
var someItm = movieItem as! MediaItem //Movie
someItm.dynamicType //Movie.Type
I've shown the output from the playground in the comment. Here you can see the type in each line.
Now according the docs of apple, The conditional form, as?, returns an optional value of the type you are trying to downcast to. As per the docs, I am trying to downcast to MediaItem, and I am getting the MediaItem as optional type.
But when I use force unwrap(that is as!) the returned type is Movie. But I wanted it to be MediaItem.
Also, another thing to notice is that, the type is actually changed. Some data are actually truncated. Because when I tried to access the director property which is present in the Movie, I cannot access it. As I've downcast it.
So, if the type is downcast, why the returned type is Movie? Shouldn't it be MediaType?
So, my question is this, when I type cast some derived class(Movie) to base class(MediaType), shouldn't the converted type be base class(MediaType)?
dynamicType tells you what the underlying type of the object is. It doesn't tell you what the type of var currently referencing that object is.
For instance:
let a: Any = 3
a.dynamicType // Int.Type
Swift, of course, keeps track of these underlying types which is what allows you to later downcast a MediaItem to a Movie (if that is what it really is).
The confusion for you came when you did:
(movieItem as? MediaItem).dynamicType //Optional<MediaItem>.Type
An Optional is it's own type. It is an enumeration with two values: .None and .Some(T). The .Some value has an associated value that has its own dynamic type. In your example, when you asked for the dynamicType, it returned the underlying type of the Optional which is Optional<MediaItem>.Type. It didn't tell you what the dynamic type of the value associated with that Optional is.
Consider this:
let x = (movieItem as? MediaItem)
x.dynamicType // Optional<MediaItem>.Type
x!.dynamicType // Movie.Type
I'm need to return a copy of an object using Swift but I can not figure out how to do this.
This how I'll do it in Objective-C:
-(NSArray*) doingSomethingwith
{
NSArray *myArray = #[#"a",#"b",#"c",#"d",];
return [myArray copy];
}
Any of you knows how to do this Swift?
I'll really appreciate your help.
If the contents of the array are value objects, as the constant strings are in your example, then simply return it; Swift assignments have copy behaviour. This is explained at the end of the Classes And Structures Apple documentation:
Assignment and Copy Behavior for Strings, Arrays, and Dictionaries
In Swift, many basic data types such as String, Array, and Dictionary are implemented as structures. This means that data such as strings, arrays, and dictionaries are copied when they are assigned to a new constant or variable, or when they are passed to a function or method.
This behavior is different from Foundation: NSString, NSArray, and NSDictionary are implemented as classes, not structures. Strings, arrays, and dictionaries in Foundation are always assigned and passed around as a reference to an existing instance, rather than as a copy.
NOTE: The description above refers to the “copying” of strings, arrays, and dictionaries. The behavior you see in your code will always be as if a copy took place. However, Swift only performs an actual copy behind the scenes when it is absolutely necessary to do so. Swift manages all value copying to ensure optimal performance, and you should not avoid assignment to try to preempt this optimization.
If your array contains reference objects, and you want to return a deep copy of them, that's a little trickier; here's a discussion about how to handle that. Although the correct way to handle that would be to redo your code to use value types.
You could do something like this.
let myArray: NSArray = ["a","b","c","d"]
func returnCopyOfArray() -> NSArray{
return myArray
}
Well, you could make the object conform to NSCopying.
class Person: NSObject, NSCopying {
var firstName: String
var lastName: String
var age: Int
init(firstName: String, lastName: String, age: Int) {
self.firstName = firstName
self.lastName = lastName
self.age = age
}
func copy(with zone: NSZone? = nil) -> Any {
let copy = Person(firstName: firstName, lastName: lastName, age: age)
return copy
}
}
Then you can call copy on it.
let clone = myPerson.copy()
If you didn't implement the class, then you can potentially extend the class if it has public or open access.
extension Person: NSCopying {
func copy(with zone: NSZone? = nil) -> Any {
let copy = Person(firstName: firstName, lastName: lastName, age: age)
return copy
}
}
Swift doesn't take references. So, you can directly return the array.
I've created the following class
class Person {
var firstName: String
var lastName: String
init(firstName: String, lastName: String) {
self.firstName = firstName
self.lastName = lastName
}
func fullName() -> String {
return "\(firstName) \(lastName)"
}
}
Then I instantiated a constant value from the class
let john = Person(firstName: "Johnny", lastName: "Applessed")
Question: Why I can change the content of the variable john? Isn't it a constant? Can someone explain that for me, thanks a lot.
john.firstName = "John"
print(john.firstName) // -> John
As #Wain has said – it's due to the nature of reference types. The instance being a let constant only means you cannot assign a new reference to it – but says nothing about the actual mutability of the instance itself.
If you change your class to a struct, you'll see how the behaviour differs with value types, as changing a property changes the actual value of your Person – therefore you are unable to do so if it's a let constant. However I somewhat doubt you'll want to make your Person a struct, as two people with the same name shouldn't be considered to be the same person.
If you only wish your properties to be assigned upon initialisation (and then read-only for the lifetime of the instance), then I would recommend making them let constants (instead of making their setters private). This will ensure that you cannot even change their value from within your class, once assigned.
The rule is as long you give a property a value before the super.init() call – you can make it a let constant (in this case, you just have to assign them in the initialiser before using self).
class Person {
let firstName: String
let lastName: String
init(firstName: String, lastName: String) {
self.firstName = firstName
self.lastName = lastName
}
...
The class instance itself is a constant, so you can't change it to reference another instance, but the instance is mutable because it's properties are created as vars.
Change firstName to have a private setter and see what you can do:
private(set) var firstName: String
When you're using a constant instance of a class in swift, doesn't mean you can't change the class attributes. It' means you can't instantiate a new object in this constant
let person = Person(firstName: "Johnny", lastName: "Appleseed")
person = Person(firstName: "John", lastName: "Appleseed") //--->It gets error: Cannor assign to value: 'person' is a 'let' constant
But you can create a constant inside class and set this values in the init
class Person {
let firstName: String
let lastName: String
init(firstName: String, lastName: String) {
self.firstName = firstName
self.lastName = lastName
}
func fullName() -> String {
return "\(firstName) \(lastName)"
}
}
//Tip: Don't init the class constants in declaration time or will get the same above error. Just init this constants at constructor/initialization of class.
And Now you have the expected result you want, even if create a 'var' instance of this object
var person = Person(firstName: "Johnny", lastName: "Appleseed")
person.firstName = "John" //--->It gets error: Cannor assign to value: 'person' is a 'let' constant
person = Person(firstName: "John", lastName: "Snow")
person.firstName = "Johnny" //--->It gets error: Cannor assign to value: 'person' is a 'let' constant
Your thinking was not wrong, but a little confuse cause you would be totally right if it was a struct instead a class.
I have this class named Meal
class Meal {
var name : String = ""
var cnt : Int = 0
var price : String = ""
var img : String = ""
var id : String = ""
init(name:String , cnt : Int, price : String, img : String, id : String) {
self.name = name
self.cnt = cnt
self.price = price
self.img = img
self.id = id
}
}
and I have an array of Meal :
var ordered = [Meal]()
I want to duplicate that array and then do some changes to the Meal instances in one of them without changing the Meal instances in the second one, how would I make a deep copy of it?
This search result didn't help me
How do I make a exact duplicate copy of an array?
Since ordered is a swift array, the statement
var orderedCopy = ordered
will effectively make a copy of the original array.
However, since Meal is a class, the new array will contain references
to the same meals referred in the original one.
If you want to copy the meals content too, so that changing a meal in one array will not change a meal in the other array, then you must define Meal as a struct, not as a class:
struct Meal {
...
From the Apple book:
Use struct to create a structure. Structures support many of the same behaviors as classes, including methods and initializers. One of the most important differences between structures and classes is that structures are always copied when they are passed around in your code, but classes are passed by reference.
To improve on #Kametrixom answer check this:
For normal objects what can be done is to implement a protocol that supports copying, and make the object class implements this protocol like this:
protocol Copying {
init(original: Self)
}
extension Copying {
func copy() -> Self {
return Self.init(original: self)
}
}
And then the Array extension for cloning:
extension Array where Element: Copying {
func clone() -> Array {
var copiedArray = Array<Element>()
for element in self {
copiedArray.append(element.copy())
}
return copiedArray
}
}
and that is pretty much it, to view code and a sample check this gist
You either have to, as #MarioZannone mentioned, make it a struct, because structs get copied automatically, or you may not want a struct and need a class. For this you have to define how to copy your class. There is the NSCopying protocol which unifies that on the ObjC world, but that makes your Swift code "unpure" in that you have to inherit from NSObject. I suggest however to define your own copying protocol like this:
protocol Copying {
init(original: Self)
}
extension Copying {
func copy() -> Self {
return Self.init(original: self)
}
}
which you can implement like this:
class Test : Copying {
var x : Int
init() {
x = 0
}
// required initializer for the Copying protocol
required init(original: Test) {
x = original.x
}
}
Within the initializer you have to copy all the state from the passed original Test on to self. Now that you implemented the protocol correctly, you can do something like this:
let original = Test()
let stillOriginal = original
let copyOriginal = original.copy()
original.x = 10
original.x // 10
stillOriginal.x // 10
copyOriginal.x // 0
This is basically the same as NSCopying just without ObjC
EDIT: Sadly this yet so beautiful protocol works very poorly with subclassing...
A simple and quick way is to map the original array into the new copy:
let copyOfPersons: [Person] = allPersons.map({(originalPerson) -> Person in
let newPerson = Person(name: originalPerson.name, age: originalPerson.age)
return newPerson
})
The new Persons will have different pointers but same values.
Based on previous answer here
If you have nested objects, i.e. subclasses to a class then what you want is True Deep Copy.
//Example
var dogsForAdoption: Array<Dog>
class Dog{
var breed: String
var owner: Person
}
So this means implementing NSCopying in every class(Dog, Person etc).
Would you do that for say 20 of your classes? what about 30..50..100? You get it right? We need native "it just works!" way. But nope we don't have one. Yet.
As of now, Feb 2021, there is no proper solution of this issue. We have many workarounds though.
Here is the one I have been using, and one with less limitations in my opinion.
Make your class conforms to codable
class Dog: Codable{
var breed : String = "JustAnyDog"
var owner: Person
}
Create this helper class
class DeepCopier {
//Used to expose generic
static func Copy<T:Codable>(of object:T) -> T?{
do{
let json = try JSONEncoder().encode(object)
return try JSONDecoder().decode(T.self, from: json)
}
catch let error{
print(error)
return nil
}
}
}
Call this method whenever you need true deep copy of your object, like this:
//Now suppose
let dog = Dog()
guard let clonedDog = DeepCopier.Copy(of: dog) else{
print("Could not detach Dog")
return
}
//Change/mutate object properties as you want
clonedDog.breed = "rottweiler"
//Also clonedDog.owner != dog.owner, as both the owner : Person have dfferent memory allocations
As you can see we are piggy backing on Swift's JSONEncoder and JSONDecoder, using power of Codable, making true deep copy no matter how many nested objects are there under our object. Just make sure all your Classes conform to Codable.
Though its NOT an ideal solution, but its one of the most effective workaround.