How to write a factory function in swift? - swift2

There are a number of other questions floating around with various complicated answers for this question, but as far as I can see, none of them answer the basic question being posed:
How do you write a factory function that takes a type and returns an instance when the return type is known?
That is:
func factory<T>(T) -> Fooish { ... }
// Usage:
class Something : Fooish { ... }
let x:Fooish = factory(Something)
For example, this code:
public class Fooish {
var x:String = ""
public func foo() -> String {
return x
}
}
public class FooA : Fooish {
public override init() {
super.init()
x = "Hello"
}
}
public class FooB : Fooish {
public override init() {
super.init()
x = "World"
}
}
// This works
print(FooA().foo())
print(FooB().foo())
// This does not work
func factory<U>(type:U) -> Fooish {
return U()
}
print(factory(FooA).foo())
print(factory(FooB).foo())
Results in this error:
Sources/main.swift:32:10: error: 'U' cannot be constructed because it has no accessible initializers
return U()
^
<unknown>:0: error: build had 1 command failures
So what is the bound to place on T, such that we can call T() and know that the returned instance is a some Fooish?
Some answers suggest using a protocol for it, such as:
protocol IsFoo {
init()
}
factory<T: IsFoo>(t:T) -> Fooish { .. }
However, this doesn't seem to work:
error: cannot invoke 'factory' with an argument list of type '((FooA).Type)'
expected an argument list of type '(U)'
Every answer to this question seems to have multiple conflicting and updated answers; please, just simply post the snippet above, with a working implementation of the function factory, for swift 2.2.

Make a protocol which defines a common initializer to be called by the factory method:
protocol FactoryInitializable {
init ()
}
func factory<T: FactoryInitializable>(type: T.Type) -> T {
return T()
}
public class Fooish {
var x = ""
public func foo() -> String {
return x
}
}
public class FooA : Fooish, FactoryInitializable {
required public override init() {
super.init()
x = "This is FooA"
}
}
public class FooB : Fooish, FactoryInitializable {
required public override init() {
super.init()
x = "This is FooB"
}
}
let a = factory(FooA)
let b = factory(FooB)
print(a.x) // print: This is FooA
print(b.x) // print: This is FooB

Related

RxSwift Delegate Binding isn't Generated?

I am trying to bind a delegate this is what was done
/** Delegate Proxy **/
func castOrThrow<T>(_ resultType: T.Type, _ object:Any) throws -> T {
guard let returnValue = object as? T else {
throw RxCocoaError.castingError(object: object, targetType: resultType)
}
return returnValue
}
#objc
public protocol TestEventGeneratorDelegate:class {
#objc optional func asyncEventResult(int:Int)
}
open class TestEventGenerator {
public var delegate: TestEventGeneratorDelegate?
func asyncCall() {
DispatchQueue.global().asyncAfter(deadline: .now() + .seconds(1)) { [weak self] in
guard let self = self else { return }
self.delegate?.asyncEventResult!(int: 0)
}
}
}
extension TestEventGenerator: HasDelegate {
public typealias Delegate = TestEventGeneratorDelegate
}
open class RxTestDelegateProxy : DelegateProxy<TestEventGenerator,TestEventGeneratorDelegate>,
DelegateProxyType,
TestEventGeneratorDelegate {
public weak private(set) var testGenerator: TestEventGenerator?
public init(testEventGenerator: ParentObject) {
self.testGenerator = testEventGenerator
super.init(parentObject: testEventGenerator, delegateProxy: RxTestDelegateProxy.self)
}
public static func registerKnownImplementations() {
self.register { RxTestDelegateProxy(testEventGenerator: $0) }
}
}
extension Reactive where Base: TestEventGenerator {
public var delegate: DelegateProxy<TestEventGenerator, TestEventGeneratorDelegate> {
return RxTestDelegateProxy.proxy(for: base)
}
public var asyncEventResult: Observable<Int> {
let source = delegate.methodInvoked(#selector(TestEventGeneratorDelegate.asyncEventResult(int:)))
.map { (a) in
return try castOrThrow(Int.self,a[0])
}
return source
}
}
/** Delegate Proxy **/
Then when I use it
let testEventGenerator = TestEventGenerator()
textEventGenerator.rx.asyncEventResult.subscribe.... // subscribe here no rx found?
testEventGenerator.asyncCall() // call and wait for the observable to return to the delegate
It doesn't compile and says there is no such rx
I have to bind it because the person who wrote the API didn't use a callback to return the value but rather a delegate.
This is example of how he wrote the code and how I want to wrap it.
Is there a way to bind a delegate that requires a kick off from asyncCall()?
so I can chain it using flatmapLatest in a promiseLike way?
Thanks let me know!
I followed these tutorial:
How to convert Delegate to Observable RxSwift?
and
https://blog.ippon.fr/2018/11/13/rxswift-how-to-make-your-favorite-delegate-based-apis-reactive/
have conform to TestEventGenerator:ReactiveCompatible and that will fix it.

Type variable in protocol - Swift 2

So I have a protocol, and in it I want a variable that is a class type. That way I can init that class from the variable.
Keep in mind that there will be many different classes. I made a quick example.
I get the error "type 'CashRegister' does not conform to protocol 'RegisterProtocol'"
This example isn't exactly what I'm doing, but it gets the point across. Thanks for the help.
protocol RegisterProtocol {
var currentBill: DollarBillProtocol {get set}
func makeNewBill()->DollarBillProtocol
}
extension RegisterProtocol {
func printCurrentBill() {
Swift.print(currentBill)
}
}
class CashRegister: RegisterProtocol {
var currentBill = OneDollarBill.self
func makeNewBill() -> DollarBillProtocol {
return currentBill.init()
}
}
protocol DollarBillProtocol {
// protocol that all bills have in common
}
class OneDollarBill: DollarBillProtocol {
required init(){
}
}
class FiveDollarBill: DollarBillProtocol {
required init(){
}
}
The way you declare currentBill in CashRegister makes it a var of type class. But the protocol RegisterProtocol requires this variable to be of type DollarBillProtocol in any class that implements the protocol. The compile error is because of this mismatch.
To make this more clear, you could declare the var with the explicit type, as follows:
class CashRegister: RegisterProtocol {
var currentBill: DollarBillProtocol = OneDollarBill() // or other initial value
}

Swift #autoclosure broke compatibility in v1.2 for enum cases

I just update Xcode to 6.3 and the Swift code that used to compile in Xcode 6.2 is not compiling now.
import Foundation
public enum Result<T> {
case Success(#autoclosure() -> T)
case Failure(NSError)
case Cancelled
public init(_ value: T) {
self = .Success(value)
}
public init(_ error: NSError) {
self = .Failure(error)
}
public init() {
self = .Cancelled
}
public var failed: Bool {
switch self {
case .Failure(let error):
return true
default:
return false
}
}
public var error: NSError? {
switch self {
case .Failure(let error):
return error
default:
return nil
}
}
public var value: T? {
switch self {
case .Success(let value):
return value()
default:
return nil
}
}
}
This line:
case Success(#autoclosure() -> T)
yields an error: 'autoclosure' attribute is only allowed on parameters, not on enum cases
Just removing #autoclosure doesn't solve the problem.
Correct. This has been removed, explicitly to prevent the case you provide. Autoclosures were not intended to be used this way, and the Swift team intentionally removed the ability to do so. In a Result type, this is dangerous because the closure will be re-evalated every time it is accessed. If there are side-effects in the closure, this can have quite surprising impacts. Even if it's just non-trivial, it can have surprising performance impacts.
The correct tool here is Box. See Rob Rix's Result for a good implementation of this type.
I think that I have found the solution. You only need to change 2 lines in your original implementation to make it work:
case Success(() -> T)
And
public init(#autoclosure(escaping) _ value: () -> T) {
For those who only want a simply solution without having to import external frameworks:
public enum Result<T> {
case Success(Box<T>)
case Failure(String)
public init(_ value: T) {
self = .Success(Box(value))
}
public init(_ error: String) {
self = .Failure(error)
}
}
// Due to current swift limitations, we have to include this Box in Result.
final public class Box<T> {
public let unbox: T
public init(_ value: T) { self.unbox = value }
}
public func success<T>(value: T) -> Result<T> {
return .Success(Box(value))
}
public func failure<T>(error: String) -> Result<T> {
return .Failure(error)
}

ARC of Swift protocol objects

ARC is deinitializing my protocol objects that still have active references, is this a bug or is it expected behavior, and what is the workaround?
protocol SomeProtocol: class {
...
}
class SomeClass: SomeProtocol {
...
}
class ClassA {
var protocolObject: SomeProtocol!
...
}
class ClassB {
var x: SomeClass!
func f() {
self.x = SomeClass()
var objA = ClassA()
objA.protocolObject = self.x
}
}
In this example, when objA is deinitialized, it attempts to deinitialize objA.protocolObject, even though there is still a reference active as objB.x. This causes a runtime error EXC_BAD_ACCESS. However, if ClassA is defined as follows:
class ClassA {
var protocolObject: SomeClass
}
The code runs without error and protocolObject is not deinitialized. Any thoughts?
Update
This bug seems to be resolved as of iOS8.0.
I'm experiencing the same problem, and have narrowed down to the issue to the protocol being defined as a Class-Only Protocol (i.e. protocol XXX: class).
protocol FooProtocol {
var name: String { get }
}
// Note: Class-Only protocol
protocol BarProtocol: class {
var name: String { get }
}
class Foo: FooProtocol {
let name: String = "Foo"
deinit {
println("\(name) deinit")
}
}
class Bar: BarProtocol {
let name: String = "Bar"
deinit {
println("\(name) deinit")
}
}
class Container {
let foo: FooProtocol = Foo()
let bar: BarProtocol = Bar()
}
class ViewController: UIViewController {
let container = Container()
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
// Prints 'Test: Foo'
test(container.foo)
// Prints 'Test: Bar', followed by 'Bar deinit'
// subsequent access to the `bar` variable results in a crash
test(container.bar)
}
func test(bar: BarProtocol) {
println("Test: \(bar.name)")
}
func test(foo: FooProtocol) {
println("Test: \(foo.name)")
}
}
Current workaround is to either forgo using class-only protocol. I have filed a bug report to Apple, rdar://18287447.

Class variables not yet supported

I begin my project with a split view controller as initial view controller and start it automatically from storyboard.
Generally, an app with this UI have one and only one split view controller as root, so I create a static variable in the subclass and set it when initialisation was done.
So I want try this behaviour with swift.
I read the Swift programming language guide book on iBook about Type properties (with static and class keyword) and trying a piece of code to the job:
import UIKit
class SplitViewController: UISplitViewController {
class func sharedInstance() -> SplitViewController {
return SplitViewController.instance
}
class let instance: SplitViewController = nil
init(nibName nibNameOrNil: String?, bundle nibBundleOrNil: NSBundle?) {
super.init(nibName: nibNameOrNil, bundle: nibBundleOrNil)
self.initialization()
}
init(coder aDecoder: NSCoder!) {
super.init(coder: aDecoder);
self.initialization()
}
func initialization() {
SplitViewController.instance = self;
}
}
but I figured out when Xcode say the class keyword for type properties wasn't supported yet.
Did you have a solution to do this ?
Embedding a struct can work just fine as a workaround:
class SomeClass
{
// class var classVariable: Int = 0
// "Class variables not yet supported." Weird.
// Workaround:
private struct SubStruct { static var staticVariable: Int = 0 }
class var workaroundClassVariable: Int
{
get { return SubStruct.staticVariable }
set { SubStruct.staticVariable = newValue }
}
}
The SomeClass.workaroundClassVariable computed type property can then be used as if it were a stored type property.
Swift now has support for static variables in classes. This is not exactly the same as a class variable (because they aren't inherited by subclasses), but it gets you pretty close:
class X {
static let y: Int = 4
static var x: Int = 4
}
println(X.x)
println(X.y)
X.x = 5
println(X.x)
It seems to be possible to declare variables with static storage duration in file scope (as in C):
var sharedInstance: SplitViewController? = nil
class SplitViewController: UISplitViewController {
....
func initialization() {
sharedInstance = self
}
}
My preferred method is to just use a private file scope var outside of the class and then implement class/static getters and setters:
private var _classVar: Int = 0;
class SomeClass
{
public class var classVar: Int
{
get { return _classVar }
set { _classVar = newValue }
}
}
As of Swift 1.2 (available with Xcode 6.3b1 and onwards), static class properties and methods are supported.
class SomeClass
{
static var someVariable: Int = 0
}
Using a dispatch_once singleton model in Swift
Seems to be the best answer so far, avoiding the use of a global variable.
A solution enough similar than var in file scope but more customisable and near singleton is to use a struct which support static var as property of class
struct PersonSharedData {
static var backstore = ""
var data: String {
get { return PersonSharedData.backstore }
set { PersonSharedData.backstore = newValue }
}
}
class Person {
var shared=PersonSharedData() //<< pseudo class var
var family: String {
get { return shared.data }
set { shared.data=newValue }
}
var firstname = ""
var lastname = ""
var sexe: Sexe = .Unknown
}
Ok, with the solution of Nikolai that do the work. I post my changes in this thread for information
var instance: SplitViewController? = nil
class SplitViewController: UISplitViewController {
class func sharedInstance() -> SplitViewController? {
return instance;
}
init(nibName nibNameOrNil: String?, bundle nibBundleOrNil: NSBundle?) {
super.init(nibName: nibNameOrNil, bundle: nibBundleOrNil)
self.initialization()
}
init(coder aDecoder: NSCoder!) {
super.init(coder: aDecoder);
self.initialization()
}
func initialization() {
instance = self
}
}
and for example, in my appDelegate, I can access this static method like this
SplitViewController.sharedInstance()!.presentsWithGesture = false
The wording in the error heavily implies this will be a language feature in the future.
You may want to resort temporarily to declaring a property variable in the Application Delegate and retrieve it from there. Not ideal, definitely an anti-pattern, but would give you a central place to retrieve the UISplitViewController when needed.
You have to wrap the class variables inside an inner struct variable
class Store{
var name:String
var address:String
var lat:Int
var long:Int
init(name:String, address:String, lat:Int, long:Int){
self.name = name
self.address = address
self.lat = lat
self.long=long
}
private struct FACTORY_INITIALIZED_FLAG { static var initialized: Bool = false
static var myStoreList:[Store]?
static func getMyStoreList()->[Store]{
if !initialized{
println("INITIALIZING")
myStoreList = [
Store(name: "Walmart", address: "abcd", lat: 10, long: 20),
Store(name: "JCPenny", address: "kjfnv", lat: 23, long: 34)
]
initialized = true
}
return myStoreList!
}
}
}
var a = Store.FACTORY_INITIALIZED_FLAG.getMyStoreList()
var b = Store.FACTORY_INITIALIZED_FLAG.getMyStoreList()
// only prints INITIALIZING once
Try this:
class var instance: SplitViewController {
return nil
}
It is called Type Property in Swift.
You define type properties with the static keyword. For computed type properties for class types, you can use the class keyword instead to allow subclasses to override the superclass’s implementation. The example below shows the syntax for stored and computed type properties:
struct SomeStructure {
static var storedTypeProperty = "Some value."
static var computedTypeProperty: Int {
return 1
}
}
enum SomeEnumeration {
static var storedTypeProperty = "Some value."
static var computedTypeProperty: Int {
return 6
}
}
class SomeClass {
static var storedTypeProperty = "Some value."
static var computedTypeProperty: Int {
return 27
}
class var overrideableComputedTypeProperty: Int {
return 107
}
}
Read more at link below,
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Swift/Conceptual/Swift_Programming_Language/Properties.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014097-CH14-ID254

Resources