I would like to use java-like enums, where you can have enum instances with custom data. For instance:
enum Country {
case Moldova(capital: "Chișinău", flagColors: [Color.Blue, Color.Yellow, Color.Red]);
case Botswana(capital: "Gaborone", flagColors: [Color.Blue, Color.White, Color.Black]);
}
I could later write:
Country.Moldova.capital;
It seems that I can indicate the variables, but not the values, and I can only assign the values when using the enum, not declaring. Which would be the best way to mimic this behaviour?
you can do something like this, which may be helpful: (that is a very generic example only)
enum Country : Int {
case Moldova, Botwana;
//
func capital() -> String {
switch (self) {
case .Moldova:
return "Chișinău"
case .Botwana:
return "Gaborone"
default:
return ""
}
}
//
func flagColours() -> Array<UIColor> {
switch (self) {
case .Moldova:
return [UIColor.blueColor(), UIColor.yellowColor(), UIColor.redColor()]
case .Botwana:
return [UIColor.blueColor(), UIColor.whiteColor(), UIColor.blackColor()]
default:
return []
}
}
//
func all() -> (capital: String, flagColours: Array<UIColor>) {
return (capital(), flagColours())
}
//
var capitolName: String {
get {
return capital()
}
}
//
var flagColoursArray: Array<UIColor> {
get {
return flagColours()
}
}
}
then you can access to the details like this:
let country: Country = Country.Botwana
get the capital
that way:
let capital: String = country.capital()
or another:
let capital: String = country.all().capital
or a third one:
let capital: String = country.capitolName
get the flag's colours:
that way:
let flagColours: Array<UIColor> = country.flagColours()
or another:
let flagColours: Array<UIColor> = country.all().flagColours
or a third one:
let flagColours: Array<UIColor> = country.flagColoursArray
Here is another generic example that is similar to the one posted by holex, but a bit closer to how it looks in Java. (I like it because all of the custom data is in one place). Instead of switching on 'self' in separate methods, I simply create a static dictionary that maps each case to a tuple containing the appropriate data. Then, I have convenience var's to get at the data easily.
enum TestEnum {
case One
case Two
case Three
private static let associatedValues = [
One: (int: 1, double: 1.0, string: "One"),
Two: (int: 2, double: 2.0, string: "Two"),
Three: (int: 3, double: 3.0, string: "Three")
]
var int: Int {
return TestEnum.associatedValues[self]!.int;
}
var double: Double {
return TestEnum.associatedValues[self]!.double;
}
var string: String {
return TestEnum.associatedValues[self]!.string;
}
}
You can access the custom data like so:
println(TestEnum.One.int) // 1
println(TestEnum.Two.double) // 2.0
println(TestEnum.Three.string) // Three
Unfortunately it seems like enums with raw values are limited to literal values. You may want to file a bug.
As an alternative, you could do something like this:
let Country = (
Moldova: (capital: "Chișinău", flagColors: [Color.Blue, Color.Yellow, Color.Red]),
Botswana: (capital: "Gaborone", flagColors: [Color.Blue, Color.White, Color.Black])
)
or this:
struct Country {
let capital: String
let flagColors: [Color]
}
let Countries = (
Moldova: Country(capital: "Chișinău", flagColors: [.Blue, .Yellow, .Red]),
Botswana: Country(capital: "Gaborone", flagColors: [.Blue, .White, .Black])
)
Related
Learning Rust I happen to need to compare variants inside nested enums. Considering following enums how do I compare actual variants of instantinated BuffTurget?
enum Attribute {
Strength,
Agility,
Intellect,
}
enum Parameter {
Health,
Mana,
}
enum BuffTarget {
Attribute(Attribute),
Parameter(Parameter),
}
Searching the web led me to the `discriminant and particularly to comparison function like this:
fn variant_eq<T>(a: &T, b: &T) -> bool {
std::mem::discriminant(a) == std::mem::discriminant(b)
}
Unfortunately this function is not working in my case:
#[test]
fn variant_check_is_working() {
let str = BuffTarget::Attribute(Attribute::Strength);
let int = BuffTarget::Attribute(Attribute::Intellect);
assert_eq!(variant_eq(&str, &int), false);
}
// Output:
// thread 'tests::variant_check' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)`
// left: `true`,
// right: `false`', src/lib.rs:11:9
Ideally I would like my code to be something like this, using if let:
let type_1 = get_variant(BuffTarget::Attribute(Attribute::Strength));
let type_2 = get_variant(BuffTarget::Attribute(Attribute::Intellect));
if let type_1 = type_2 {
println!("Damn it!")
} else { println!("Success!!!") }
Found suitable solution in this answer. Use #[derive(PartialEq)] for the enums to compare them with ==: enum_1 == enum_2.
#[derive(PartialEq)]
enum Attribute {
Strength,
Agility,
Intellect,
}
#[derive(PartialEq)]
enum Parameter {
Health,
Mana,
}
#[derive(PartialEq)]
enum BuffTarget {
Attribute(Attribute),
Parameter(Parameter),
}
let type_1 = BuffTarget::Attribute(Attribute::Strength));
let type_2 = BuffTarget::Attribute(Attribute::Intellect));
assert_eq!((type_1 == type_2), false);
Isn't it possible to set the type of a parameter to an Enum? Like this:
private getRandomElementOfEnum(e : enum):string{
var length:number = Object.keys(e).length;
return e[Math.floor((Math.random() * length)+1)];
}
Following error is thrown:
Argument expression expected.(1135)
With any obviously everything is alright:
private getRandomElementOfEnum(e : any):string{
var length:number = Object.keys(e).length;
return e[Math.floor((Math.random() * length)+1)];
}
Is there a possibility or a little workaround to define an enum as a parameter?
It's not possible to ensure the parameter is an enum, because enumerations in TS don't inherit from a common ancestor or interface.
TypeScript brings static analysis. Your code uses dynamic programming with Object.keys and e[dynamicKey]. For dynamic codes, the type any is convenient.
Your code is buggy: length() doesn't exists, e[Math.floor((Math.random() * length)+1)] returns a string or an integer, and the enumeration values can be manually set…
Here is a suggestion:
function getRandomElementOfEnum<E>(e: any): E {
var keys = Object.keys(e),
index = Math.floor(Math.random() * keys.length),
k = keys[index];
if (typeof e[k] === 'number')
return <any>e[k];
return <any>parseInt(k, 10);
}
function display(a: Color) {
console.log(a);
}
enum Color { Blue, Green };
display(getRandomElementOfEnum<Color>(Color));
Ideally, the parameter type any should be replaced by typeof E but the compiler (TS 1.5) can't understand this syntax.
You can do better than any:
enum E1 {
A, B, C
}
enum E2 {
X, Y, Z
}
function getRandomElementOfEnum(e: { [s: number]: string }): number {
/* insert working implementation here */
return undefined;
}
// OK
var x: E1 = getRandomElementOfEnum(E1);
// Error
var y: E2 = getRandomElementOfEnum(window);
// Error
var z: string = getRandomElementOfEnum(E2);
I agree with #Tarh. Enums in TypeScript are just Javascript objects without a common interface or prototype (and if they are const enum, then they are not even objects), so you cannot restrict types to "any enum".
The closest I could get is something like the following:
enum E1 {
A, B, C
}
enum E2 {
X, Y, Z
}
// make up your own interface to match TypeScript enums
// as closely as possible (not perfect, though)
interface Enum {
[id: number]: string
}
function getRandomElementOfEnum(e: Enum): string {
let length = Object.keys(e).length / 2;
return e[Math.floor((Math.random() * length))];
}
This works for all enums (without custom initializers), but it would also accept other arrays as input (and then fail because the method body relies on the very specific key structure that TypeScript enums have).
So unless you have a real need for such a "generic" function, make typesafe functions for the individual enum types (or a union type like E1|E2|E3) that you actually need.
And if you do have this need (and this might very well be an X-Y-problem that can be solved in a better, completely different way given more context), use any, because you have left typesafe territory anyway.
Summing up the previous answers with some new syntax - a generic typesafe function, which works with numeric enums as well as string enums:
function getRandomElementOfEnum<T extends {[key: number]: string | number}>(e: T): T[keyof T] {
const keys = Object.keys(e);
const randomKeyIndex = Math.floor(Math.random() * keys.length);
const randomKey = keys[randomKeyIndex];
// Numeric enums members also get a reverse mapping from enum values to enum names.
// So, if a key is a number, actually it's a value of a numeric enum.
// see https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/enums.html#reverse-mappings
const randomKeyNumber = Number(randomKey);
return isNaN(randomKeyNumber)
? e[randomKey as keyof T]
: randomKeyNumber as unknown as T[keyof T];
}
Another possible option not mentioned above is using the actual values. This is however possible only when you know all the options. This, in my opinion is definitely better than any.
doSomething(a: string, b: 'this'|'can'|'work'): void {
//do something
}
Tested on TypeScript 3.9.7
Solution
type EnumTypeString<TEnum extends string> =
{ [key in string]: TEnum | string; }
type EnumTypeNumber<TEnum extends number> =
{ [key in string]: TEnum | number; }
| { [key in number]: string; }
type EnumType<TEnum extends string | number> =
(TEnum extends string ? EnumTypeString<TEnum> : never)
| (TEnum extends number ? EnumTypeNumber<TEnum> : never)
type EnumOf<TEnumType> = TEnumType extends EnumType<infer U>
? U
: never
Usage
EnumType:
function forEachEnum<TEnum extends string | number>(
enumType: EnumType<TEnum>,
callback: (value: TEnum, key: string) => boolean|void,
) {
for (let key in enumType) {
if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(enumType, key) && isNaN(Number(key))) {
const value = enumType[key] as any
if (callback(value, key)) {
return
}
}
}
}
EnumOf:
function forEachEnum2<TEnumType>(
enumType: TEnumType,
callback: (value: EnumOf<TEnumType>, key: string) => boolean|void,
) {
for (let key in enumType) {
if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(enumType, key) && isNaN(Number(key))) {
const value = enumType[key] as any
if (callback(value, key)) {
return
}
}
}
}
Tests
enum EnumAsString {
Value1 = 'value 1',
Value2 = 'value 2',
}
enum EnumAsNumber {
Value1 = 1,
Value2 = 2,
}
// Error
let sn: EnumType<string> = EnumAsNumber
// Correct
let ns: EnumType<number> = EnumAsString // I have not found a solution for the error here
let nn: EnumType<number> = EnumAsNumber
let Nn: EnumType<EnumAsNumber> = EnumAsNumber
let ss: EnumType<string> = EnumAsString
let Ss: EnumType<EnumAsString> = EnumAsString
forEachEnum(EnumAsString, value => {
let e: EnumAsString = value
let s: string = value
let n: number = value // Error
})
forEachEnum(EnumAsNumber, value => {
let e: EnumAsNumber = value
let s: string = value // Error
let n: number = value
})
forEachEnum2(EnumAsString, value => {
let e: EnumAsString = value
let s: string = value
let n: number = value // Error
})
forEachEnum2(EnumAsNumber, value => {
let e: EnumAsNumber = value
let s: string = value // Error
let n: number = value
})
May be this trick will fit:
enum AbstractEnum { // put somewhere in hidden scope
}
private getRandomElementOfEnum(e: typeof AbstractEnum) {
...
}
#selinathat's solution is great only if you have few types. but what if we have more ? for example :
doSomething(a: string, b: 'this'|'can'|'work'|'test1'|'test2'|'test3'): void {
//do something
}
its pretty ugly hah !?
i prefer to use keyof :
interface Items {
'this',
'can',
'work',
'test1',
'test2',
'test3',
}
doSomething(a: string, b: keyof Items): void {
//do something
}
Here is an example that allows passing an enum with a typechecked value of that enum using a generic. It's really a response to a slightly different question here that was marked as a duplicate: Typescript how to pass enum as Parameter
enum Color {
blue,
};
enum Car {
cadillac,
};
enum Shape {
square,
}
type SupportedEnums = typeof Color | typeof Car;
type InvertTypeOf<T> = T extends typeof Color ? Color :
T extends typeof Car ? Car : never;
function getText<T extends SupportedEnums>(enumValue: InvertTypeOf<T>, typeEnum: T) string | undefined {
if (typeEnum[enumValue]) {
return `${enumValue}(${typeEnum[enumValue]})`;
}
}
console.log(getText(Car.cadillac, Car)); // 0(cadillac)
console.log(getText(0, Color)); // 0(red)
console.log(getText(4, Color)); // undefined
// #ts-expect-error Color is not Car
console.log(getText(Color.blue, Car));
// #ts-expect-error Car is not a Color
console.log(getText(Car.toyota, Color));
// #ts-expect-error Shape is not in SupportedEnums
console.log(getText(5, Shape));
// #ts-expect-error Shape is not in SupportedEnums
console.log(getText(Shape.square, Shape));
I had the same kind of problem, and i did this
private getOptionsFromEnum(OptionEnum: Record<string, string>): Array<SelectOption> {
return Object.keys(OptionEnum).map((value) => {
return {
name: OptionEnum[value],
value,
} as SelectOption;
});
}
I made a helper type to accept any enum as a paramaeter, then you can handle whatever you need next with Object or by calling an index of the Enum.
type Enum = Record<string | number, string | number>
Now use it to accept any enum as parameter:
function enumValues<T extends Enum>(enum: T, filter?: "string"): string[];
function enumValues<T extends Enum>(enum: T, filter?: "number"): number[];
function enumValues<T extends Enum>(enum: T, filter?: undefined): (string|number)[];
function enumValues<T extends Enum>(enum: T, filter?: "string" | "number") {
return Object.values(enum).filter(x => !filter || typeof x === filter);
}
enum color {
red,
green,
blue
}
console.log(enumValues(color,"string"));
// output ['red','green','blue']
console.log(enumValues(color,"number"));
// output [0,1,2]
I get this error:
'NSNumber' is not a subtype of Cat
Here is the code:
enum Cat:Int {
case Siamese = 0
case Tabby
case Fluffy
}
let cat = indexPath.row as Cat
switch cat {
case .Siamese:
//do something
break;
case .Tabby:
//do something else
break;
case .Fluffy:
break;
}
How can I resolve this error?
Use Cat.fromRaw(indexPath.row) to get the enumeration.
Because the return value of fromRaw() is an optional, use it like thus:
if let cat = Cat.fromRaw (indexPath.row) {
switch cat {
// ...
}
}
The way I handled this same kind of situation in a recent app was to use a Struct consisting entirely of static members, instead of an Enum - in part because I had more information to associate with each option, in part because I got sick of having to call toRaw() and fromRaw() everyplace, and in part because (as your example shows you've discovered) an Enum loses its advantage when it turns out that you can't cycle through, or get a complete list of, the cases.
So, what I did was this:
struct Sizes {
static let Easy = "Easy"
static let Normal = "Normal"
static let Hard = "Hard"
static func sizes () -> [String] {
return [Easy, Normal, Hard]
}
static func boardSize (s:String) -> (Int,Int) {
let d = [
Easy:(12,7),
Normal:(14,8),
Hard:(16,9)
]
return d[s]!
}
}
struct Styles {
static let Animals = "Animals"
static let Snacks = "Snacks"
static func styles () -> [String] {
return [Animals, Snacks]
}
static func pieces (s:String) -> (Int,Int) {
let d = [
Animals:(11,110),
Snacks:(21,210)
]
return d[s]!
}
}
Now when we get to cellForRowAtIndexPath I can talk like this:
let section = indexPath.section
let row = indexPath.row
switch section {
case 0:
cell.textLabel.text = Sizes.sizes()[row]
case 1:
cell.textLabel.text = Styles.styles()[row]
default:
cell.textLabel.text = "" // throwaway
}
Essentially I've just used the two Structs as namespaces with some added intelligence. I'm not saying this is better than what you're doing; they are both eminently Swifty. It's just another idea to consider.
How should bit fields be declared and used in Swift?
Declaring an enum like this does work, but trying to OR 2 values together fails to compile:
enum MyEnum: Int
{
case One = 0x01
case Two = 0x02
case Four = 0x04
case Eight = 0x08
}
// This works as expected
let m1: MyEnum = .One
// Compiler error: "Could not find an overload for '|' that accepts the supplied arguments"
let combined: MyEnum = MyEnum.One | MyEnum.Four
I looked at how Swift imports Foundation enum types, and it does so by defining a struct that conforms to the RawOptionSet protocol:
struct NSCalendarUnit : RawOptionSet {
init(_ value: UInt)
var value: UInt
static var CalendarUnitEra: NSCalendarUnit { get }
static var CalendarUnitYear: NSCalendarUnit { get }
// ...
}
And the RawOptionSet protocol is:
protocol RawOptionSet : LogicValue, Equatable {
class func fromMask(raw: Self.RawType) -> Self
}
However, there is no documentation on this protocol and I can't figure out how to implement it myself. Moreover, it's not clear if this is the official Swift way of implementing bit fields or if this is only how the Objective-C bridge represents them.
You can build a struct that conforms to the RawOptionSet protocol, and you'll be able to use it like the built-in enum type but with bitmask functionality as well. The answer here shows how:
Swift NS_OPTIONS-style bitmask enumerations.
Updated for Swift 2/3
Since swift 2, a new solution has been added as "raw option set" (see: Documentation), which is essentially the same as my original response, but using structs that allow arbitrary values.
This is the original question rewritten as an OptionSet:
struct MyOptions: OptionSet
{
let rawValue: UInt8
static let One = MyOptions(rawValue: 0x01)
static let Two = MyOptions(rawValue: 0x02)
static let Four = MyOptions(rawValue: 0x04)
static let Eight = MyOptions(rawValue: 0x08)
}
let m1 : MyOptions = .One
let combined : MyOptions = [MyOptions.One, MyOptions.Four]
Combining with new values can be done exactly as Set operations (thus the OptionSet part), .union, likewise:
m1.union(.Four).rawValue // Produces 5
Same as doing One | Four in its C-equivalent. As for One & Mask != 0, can be specified as a non-empty intersection
// Equivalent of A & B != 0
if !m1.intersection(combined).isEmpty
{
// m1 belongs is in combined
}
Weirdly enough, most of the C-style bitwise enums have been converted to their OptionSet equivalent on Swift 3, but Calendar.Compontents does away with a Set<Enum>:
let compontentKeys : Set<Calendar.Component> = [.day, .month, .year]
Whereas the original NSCalendarUnit was a bitwise enum. So both approaches are usable (thus the original response remains valid)
Original Response
I think the best thing to do, is to simply avoid the bitmask syntax until the Swift devs figure out a better way.
Most of the times, the problem can be solved using an enum and and a Set
enum Options
{
case A, B, C, D
}
var options = Set<Options>(arrayLiteral: .A, .D)
An and check (options & .A) could be defined as:
options.contains(.A)
Or for multiple "flags" could be:
options.isSupersetOf(Set<Options>(arrayLiteral: .A, .D))
Adding new flags (options |= .C):
options.insert(.C)
This also allows for using all the new stuff with enums: custom types, pattern matching with switch case, etc.
Of course, it doesn't have the efficiency of bitwise operations, nor it would be compatible with low level things (like sending bluetooth commands), but it's useful for UI elements that the overhead of the UI outweighs the cost of the Set operations.
They showed how to do this in one of the WWDC videos.
let combined = MyEnum.One.toRaw() | MyEnum.Four.toRaw()
Note that combined will be Int type and will actually get a compiler error if you specify let combined: MyEnum. That is because there is no enum value for 0x05 which is the result of the expression.
I think maybe some of the answers here are outdated with overcomplicated solutions? This works fine for me..
enum MyEnum: Int {
case One = 0
case Two = 1
case Three = 2
case Four = 4
case Five = 8
case Six = 16
}
let enumCombined = MyEnum.Five.rawValue | MyEnum.Six.rawValue
if enumCombined & MyEnum.Six.rawValue != 0 {
println("yay") // prints
}
if enumCombined & MyEnum.Five.rawValue != 0 {
println("yay again") // prints
}
if enumCombined & MyEnum.Two.rawValue != 0 {
println("shouldn't print") // doesn't print
}
If you don't need to interoperate with Objective-C and just want the syntax of bit masks in Swift, I've written a simple "library" called BitwiseOptions that can do this with regular Swift enumerations, e.g.:
enum Animal: BitwiseOptionsType {
case Chicken
case Cow
case Goat
static let allOptions = [.Chicken, .Cow, .Goat]
}
var animals = Animal.Chicken | Animal.Goat
animals ^= .Goat
if animals & .Chicken == .Chicken {
println("Chick-Fil-A!")
}
and so on. No actual bits are being flipped here. These are set operations on opaque values. You can find the gist here.
#Mattt's very famous "NSHipster" has an extensive detailed description of the RawOptionsSetType : http://nshipster.com/rawoptionsettype/
It includes a handy Xcode snipped:
struct <# Options #> : RawOptionSetType, BooleanType {
private var value: UInt = 0
init(_ value: UInt) { self.value = value }
var boolValue: Bool { return value != 0 }
static func fromMask(raw: UInt) -> <# Options #> { return self(raw) }
static func fromRaw(raw: UInt) -> <# Options #>? { return self(raw) }
func toRaw() -> UInt { return value }
static var allZeros: <# Options #> { return self(0) }
static func convertFromNilLiteral() -> <# Options #> { return self(0) }
static var None: <# Options #> { return self(0b0000) }
static var <# Option #>: <# Options #> { return self(0b0001) }
// ...
}
You have to use .toRaw() after each member:
let combined: Int = MyEnum.One.toRaw() | MyEnum.Four.toRaw()
will work. Because as it is you're just trying to assign "One" which is a MyEnum type, not an integer. As Apple's documentation says:
“Unlike C and Objective-C, Swift enumeration members are not assigned a default integer value when they are created. In the CompassPoints example, North, South, East and West do not implicitly equal 0, 1, 2 and 3. Instead, the different enumeration members are fully-fledged values in their own right, with an explicitly-defined type of CompassPoint.”
so you have to use raw values if you want the members to represent some other type, as described here:
Enumeration members can come prepopulated with default values (called raw values), which are all of the same type. The raw value for a particular enumeration member is always the same. Raw values can be strings, characters, or any of the integer or floating-point number types. Each raw value must be unique within its enumeration declaration. When integers are used for raw values, they auto-increment if no value is specified for some of the enumeration members. Access the raw value of an enumeration member with its toRaw method.
I use the following I need the both values I can get, rawValue for indexing arrays and value for flags.
enum MyEnum: Int {
case one
case two
case four
case eight
var value: UInt8 {
return UInt8(1 << self.rawValue)
}
}
let flags: UInt8 = MyEnum.one.value ^ MyEnum.eight.value
(flags & MyEnum.eight.value) > 0 // true
(flags & MyEnum.four.value) > 0 // false
(flags & MyEnum.two.value) > 0 // false
(flags & MyEnum.one.value) > 0 // true
MyEnum.eight.rawValue // 3
MyEnum.four.rawValue // 2
This worked for me.
1 << 0 //0000
1 << 1 //0010
1 << 2 //0100
1 << 3 //1000
enum Collision: Int {
case Enemy, Projectile, Debris, Ground
func bitmask() -> UInt32 {
return 1 << self.rawValue
}
}
I'm taking a guess that something like this is how they are modeling enum options in Foundation:
struct TestOptions: RawOptionSet {
// conform to RawOptionSet
static func fromMask(raw: UInt) -> TestOptions {
return TestOptions(raw)
}
// conform to LogicValue
func getLogicValue() -> Bool {
if contains([1, 2, 4], value) {
return true
}
return false
}
// conform to RawRepresentable
static func fromRaw(raw: UInt) -> TestOptions? {
if contains([1, 2, 4], raw) {
return TestOptions(raw)
}
return nil
}
func toRaw() -> UInt {
return value
}
// options and value
var value: UInt
init(_ value: UInt) {
self.value = value
}
static var OptionOne: TestOptions {
return TestOptions(1)
}
static var OptionTwo: TestOptions {
return TestOptions(2)
}
static var OptionThree: TestOptions {
return TestOptions(4)
}
}
let myOptions = TestOptions.OptionOne | TestOptions.OptionThree
println("myOptions: \(myOptions.toRaw())")
if (myOptions & TestOptions.OptionOne) {
println("OPTION ONE is in there")
} else {
println("nope, no ONE")
}
if (myOptions & TestOptions.OptionTwo) {
println("OPTION TWO is in there")
} else {
println("nope, no TWO")
}
if (myOptions & TestOptions.OptionThree) {
println("OPTION THREE is in there")
} else {
println("nope, no THREE")
}
let nextOptions = myOptions | TestOptions.OptionTwo
println("options: \(nextOptions.toRaw())")
if (nextOptions & TestOptions.OptionOne) {
println("OPTION ONE is in there")
} else {
println("nope, no ONE")
}
if (nextOptions & TestOptions.OptionTwo) {
println("OPTION TWO is in there")
} else {
println("nope, no TWO")
}
if (nextOptions & TestOptions.OptionThree) {
println("OPTION THREE is in there")
} else {
println("nope, no THREE")
}
...where myOptions and nextOptions are of type TestOptions - I'm not exactly sure how fromMask() and getLogicValue() are supposed to act here (I just took some best guesses), maybe somebody could pick this up and work it out?
If you want bitfield in Swift, then enum is the wrong way. Better just do like this
class MyBits {
static let One = 0x01
static let Two = 0x02
static let Four = 0x04
static let Eight = 0x08
}
let m1 = MyBits.One
let combined = MyBits.One | MyBits.Four
You don't really need the class/static wrapper, but I include it as a kind of pseudo namespace.
Do bitwise operation using raw value then create a new enum object using the result.
let mask = UIViewAutoresizing(rawValue: UIViewAutoresizing.FlexibleWidth.rawValue|UIViewAutoresizing.FlexibleHeight.rawValue)
self.view.autoresizingMask = mask
Here's something I put together to try to make a Swift enum that resembles to some extent a C# flags-style enum. But I'm just learning Swift, so this should only be considered to be "proof of concept" code.
/// This EnumBitFlags protocol can be applied to a Swift enum definition, providing a small amount
/// of compatibility with the flags-style enums available in C#.
///
/// The enum should be defined as based on UInt, and enum values should be defined that are powers
/// of two (1, 2, 4, 8, ...). The value zero, if defined, should only be used to indicate a lack of
/// data or an error situation.
///
/// Note that with C# the enum may contain a value that does not correspond to the defined enum
/// constants. This is not possible with Swift, it enforces that only valid values can be set.
public protocol EnumBitFlags : RawRepresentable, BitwiseOperations {
var rawValue : UInt { get } // This provided automatically by enum
static func createNew(_ rawValue : UInt) -> Self // Must be defined as some boiler-plate code
}
/// Extension methods for enums that implement the EnumBitFlags protocol.
public extension EnumBitFlags {
// Implement protocol BitwiseOperations. But note that some of these operators, especially ~,
// will almost certainly result in an invalid (nil) enum object, resulting in a crash.
public static func & (leftSide: Self, rightSide: Self) -> Self {
return self.createNew(leftSide.rawValue & rightSide.rawValue)
}
public static func | (leftSide: Self, rightSide: Self) -> Self {
return self.createNew(leftSide.rawValue | rightSide.rawValue)
}
public static func ^ (leftSide: Self, rightSide: Self) -> Self {
return self.createNew(leftSide.rawValue ^ rightSide.rawValue)
}
public static prefix func ~ (x: Self) -> Self {
return self.createNew(~x.rawValue)
}
public static var allZeros: Self {
get {
return self.createNew(0)
}
}
// Method hasFlag() for compatibility with C#
func hasFlag<T : EnumBitFlags>(_ flagToTest : T) -> Bool {
return (self.rawValue & flagToTest.rawValue) != 0
}
}
This shows how it can be used:
class TestEnumBitFlags {
// Flags-style enum specifying where to write the log messages
public enum LogDestination : UInt, EnumBitFlags {
case none = 0 // Error condition
case systemOutput = 0b01 // Logging messages written to system output file
case sdCard = 0b10 // Logging messages written to SD card (or similar storage)
case both = 0b11 // Both of the above options
// Implement EnumBitFlags protocol
public static func createNew(_ rawValue : UInt) -> LogDestination {
return LogDestination(rawValue: rawValue)!
}
}
private var _logDestination : LogDestination = .none
private var _anotherEnum : LogDestination = .none
func doTest() {
_logDestination = .systemOutput
assert(_logDestination.hasFlag(LogDestination.systemOutput))
assert(!_logDestination.hasFlag(LogDestination.sdCard))
_anotherEnum = _logDestination
assert(_logDestination == _anotherEnum)
_logDestination = .systemOutput | .sdCard
assert(_logDestination.hasFlag(LogDestination.systemOutput) &&
_logDestination.hasFlag(LogDestination.sdCard))
/* don't do this, it results in a crash
_logDestination = _logDestination & ~.systemOutput
assert(_logDestination == .sdCard)
*/
_logDestination = .sdCard
_logDestination |= .systemOutput
assert(_logDestination == .both)
}
}
Suggestions for improvement are welcome.
EDIT: I've given up on this technique myself, and therefore obviously can't recommend it anymore.
The big problem is that Swift demands that rawValue must match one of the defined enum values. This is OK if there are only 2 or 3 or maybe even 4 flag bits - just define all of the combination values in order to make Swift happy. But for 5 or more flag bits it becomes totally crazy.
I'll leave this posted in case someone finds it useful, or maybe as a warning of how NOT to do it.
My current solution to this situation is based on using a struct instead of enum, together with a protocol and some extension methods. This works much better. Maybe I'll post it someday when I'm more sure that that isn't also isn't going to backfire on me.
Task
Get all flags from flags_combination. Each flag and flags_combination are integers. flags_combination = flag_1 | flags_2
Details
Xcode 11.2.1 (11B500), Swift 5.1
Solution
import Foundation
protocol FlagPrototype: CaseIterable, RawRepresentable where RawValue == Int {}
extension FlagPrototype {
init?(rawValue: Int) {
for flag in Self.allCases where flag.rawValue == rawValue {
self = flag
return
}
return nil
}
static func all(from combination: Int) -> [Self] {
return Self.allCases.filter { return combination | $0.rawValue == combination }
}
}
Usage
enum Flag { case one, two, three }
extension Flag: FlagPrototype {
var rawValue: Int {
switch self {
case .one: return 0x1
case .two: return 0x2
case .three: return 0x4
}
}
}
var flags = Flag.two.rawValue | Flag.three.rawValue
let selectedFlags = Flag.all(from: flags)
print(selectedFlags)
if selectedFlags == [.two, .three] { print("two | three") }
I have the following Playground code:
// Playground - noun: a place where people can play
import Cocoa
extension Array {
func toHexString<CUnsignedChar>() -> String {
var returnString = NSMutableString(capacity: self.count * 2)
for i in self {
let val = i as Int // if someone would like to answer why casting this as a CUnsignedChar throws an error, I'd appreciate it -- but that's a separate question
returnString.appendFormat("%02X", val)
}
return returnString
}
}
var hashedString: String? {
get {
let x: CUnsignedChar[] = [0xA, 0xB, 0xC]
return x.toHexString()
}
}
println(hashedString)
This causes the error, "NSString is not a subtype of 'String'"
However, if I rewrite this code to be:
var hashedString: String? {
get {
let x: CUnsignedChar[] = [0xA, 0xB, 0xC]
var returnString = NSMutableString(capacity: x.count * 2)
for i in x {
returnString.appendFormat("%02X", i)
}
return returnString
}
}
println(hashedString)
I get no error.
Couple things I would recommend.
First, use UInt8 instead of CUnsignedChar for an array of bytes. Also, I would stay away from NSMutableString and use standard string concatenation and interpolation via Swift. I have not had much success trying to use CVarArgs inside Swift.
Here is my implementation:
extension Array
{
func toHexString() -> String
{
var hexString = ""
for value in self
{
if let integerValue = value as? UInt8
{
let stringValue = String(integerValue, radix: 16)
if integerValue < 0x10
{ hexString += "0\(stringValue)" }
else
{ hexString += stringValue }
}
}
return hexString;
}
}
let arrayOfBytes : Array<UInt8> = [ 0x0A, 0x13, 0x02, 0x2F, 0x22, 0x7A, 0xF1 ]
let hash = arrayOfBytes.toHexString()
let hashUppercase = hash.uppercaseString
It is unfortunate that you cannot create an extension solely for Array<UInt8> and must extend all Arrays, even if your method is only valid for one type.
I think it has to do with the fact that your extension does not return an optional, but your hashedString does.
However, the playground crashes like crazy when I try to mess around with the above code. =)