I have array of objects 'Games' some fields of game have ids property of different types of objects. I need to load these object async by ids, to have fully loaded game with objects.
struct Game: Codable {
var field1: Int
var field2: Int
var field1Object: Object1?
var field2Object: Object2?
.....
}
func fetchData(_ games: [Game]) async -> [Game] {
await withTaskGroup(of: Game.self) { group in
var updatedGames = [Game]()
updatedGames.reserveCapacity(games.count)
for game in games {
group.addTask {
let field1Object = await loadObjectBy(game.field1)
game.field1Object = field1Object
return game
}
group.addTask {
let field2Object = await loadObjectBy(game.field2)
game.field2Object = field2Object
return game
}
}
for await updatedGame in group {
updatedGames.append(updatedGame)
}
return updatedGames
}
}
I have error 'game is let constant', How to correctly load object? Can I modify game in addTask closure?
The error "game is let constant" is a duplicated issue. For example, see this one:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/74603997/18557672
game is the element iterated inside the loop, it's just a copy, and of course it only exists inside the loop's closure.
To access and modify a specific element of the "games" var inside the closure, you need to implement your code with that in mind. You could maybe use (as suggested by #Rob):
for index in games.indices {
...
games[index]
...
}
You should try to fix that issue first, and then, if you still have problems with the original task, try to edit the question with the updated info.
Related
In swift 4.2 I am facing the problem while handling the two array objects, When I am removing objects from another array, the values are removed from the all the objects.
1) Below is my closure
func GetChatBotData(completion: #escaping (_ result: ChatV_1_Model) -> Void) {
var ChatBotData : ChatV_1_Model! = nil
ApiHelper.sharedSession.postLoacl("http://localhost:3000/posts/", postData: NSDictionary(), methodtype: Constant.API.httpGet) { (isError, data, errorDescription) in
DispatchQueue.main.async(execute: {
if isError == false {
ChatBotData = ChatV_1_Model.init(fromDictionary: data!)
completion(ChatBotData)
}
else {
//completion("Error to get result" as AnyObject)
completion(ChatBotData)
}
})
}
}
Now In my controller
var PKComponents = [Chatbot_V_1_DataModel]()
var ChatMessages = [Chatbot_V_1_DataModel]()
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
GetChatBotData() {(result: ChatbotV_1_Model!) in
print("Call Plans: \(result!)")
self.PKComponents = result.data
self.ChatMessages = result.data
self.ChatMessages[0].component.removeAll()
}
In Viewdidload I am removing objects from self.ChatMessages array but it removes from all the objects like, PKComponents and result.data as well.
Note: I have seen the reference of the result is same as PKComponents and Chatmessages.
How to resolve this?
Here's the simplified example, where I can reproduce your problem:
class Component {
}
class SomeData {
var components: [Component]
init(components : [Component]) {
self.components = components
}
}
class Result {
var data: [SomeData]
init(data: [SomeData]) {
self.data = data
}
}
let someData = SomeData(components: [Component()])
let result = Result(data: [someData])
//problem begins here
let pkCompent = result.data
var chatMsgs = result.data
print(pkCompent[0].components.count)
chatMsgs[0].components.removeAll()
print(pkCompent[0].components.count)
Inorder to avoid the reference issue, convert SomeData to struct
struct SomeData {
var components: [Component]
init(components : [Component]) {
self.components = components
}
}
You have 2 suggestions.
1- Deep copy .
2- Use struct instead of class since its value type.
Incase of deep copy this is a simple example,
when you assign something to new instance use this way.
// Deep copy
var foo = Foo()
var otherFoo = Foo(foo)
rather than this.
var fee = foo // shallow copy still the same referance
Note: this is handled by swift you don't have to add any inits to the class.
component is what you are removing it from and not the Array to
be precise.
While arrays implementation in swift is using a Struct which is a
value type and not a Object type, what your array is holding, i.e
Object of Chatbot_V_1_DataModel might as well be a class thus, the
elements held in your array are references to object of type
Chatbot_V_1_DataModel.
the way you can work around this is by having Chatbot_V_1_DataModel
defined as a struct thus, a value type OR by making a deep copy of
you array and then using that copy in you closure as you modify it.
I am talking about something on these lines:
var copie = arr.map{$0.mutableCopy()}
better yet:
var PKComponents = [Chatbot_V_1_DataModel]()
var ChatMessages = [Chatbot_V_1_DataModel]()
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
var copie = arr.map{$0.mutableCopy()} // use this copy now elsewhere!!!
GetChatBotData() {(result: ChatbotV_1_Model!) in
print("Call Plans: \(result!)")
self.PKComponents = result.data
self.ChatMessages = result.data
self.ChatMessages[0].component.removeAll()
}
This is the problem of deep copying. Either you write a complete initializer that copies everything and create a new object and use that instead of just assignment. Or use struct instead of class. But as a quick fix you can explicitly only copy the component array like this:
self.PKCOMPONENTS = results.data
self.PKCOMPONENTS.components = Array(results.data.components)
OK, first, I know that there is no such thing as AnyRealmObject.
But I have a need to have something the behaves just like a Realm List, with the exception that any kind of Realm Object can be added to the list -- they don't all have to be the same type.
Currently, I have something like this:
enter code here
class Family: Object {
var pets: List<Pet>
}
class Pet: Object {
var dog: Dog?
var cat: Cat?
var rabbit: Rabbit?
}
Currently, if I wanted to add in, say, Bird, I'd have to modify the Pet object. I don't want to keep modifying that class.
What I really want to do is this:
class Family: Object {
var pets: List<Object>
}
Or, maybe, define a Pet protocol, that must be an Object, and have var pets: List<Pet>
The point is, I want a databag that can contain any Realm Object that I pass into it. The only requirement for the databag is that the objects must be Realm Objects.
Now, since Realm doesn't allow for this, how could I do this, anyway? I was thinking of creating something like a Realm ObjectReference class:
class ObjectReference: Object {
var className: String
var primaryKeyValue: String
public init(with object: Object) {
className = ???
primaryKeyValue = ???
}
public func object() -> Object? {
guard let realm = realm else { return nil }
var type = ???
var primaryKey: AnyObject = ???
return realm.object(ofType: type, forPrimaryKey: primaryKey)(
}
}
The stuff with the ??? is what I'm asking about. If there's a better way of doing this I'm all ears. I think my approach is ok, I just don't know how to fill in the blanks, here.
(I'm assuming that you are writing an application, and that the context of the code samples and problem you provided is in terms of application code, not creating a library.)
Your approach seems to be a decent one given Realm's current limitations; I can't think of anything better off the top of my head. You can use NSClassFromString() to turn your className string into a Swift metaclass object you can use with the object(ofType:...) API:
public func object() -> Object? {
let applicationName = // (application name goes here)
guard let realm = realm else { return nil }
guard let type = NSClassFromString("\(applicationName).\(className)") as? Object.Type else {
print("Error: \(className) isn't the name of a Realm class.")
return nil
}
var primaryKey: String = primaryKeyValue
return realm.object(ofType: type, forPrimaryKey: primaryKey)(
}
My recommendation is that you keep things simple and use strings exclusively as primary keys. If you really need to be able to use arbitrary types as primary keys you can take a look at our dynamic API for ideas as to how to extract the primary key value for a given object. (Note that although this API is technically a public API we don't generally offer support for it nor do we encourage its use except when the typed APIs are inadequate.)
In the future, we hope to offer enhanced support for subclassing and polymorphism. Depending on how this feature is designed, it might allow us to introduce APIs to allow subclasses of a parent object type to be inserted into a list (although that poses its own problems).
This may not be a complete answer but could provide some direction. If I am reading the question correctly (with comments) the objective is to have a more generic object that can be the base class for other objects.
While that's not directly doable - i.e. An NSObject is the base for NSView, NSString etc, how about this...
Let's define some Realm objects
class BookClass: Object {
#objc dynamic var author = ""
}
class CardClass: Object {
#objc dynamic var team = ""
}
class MugClass: Object {
#objc dynamic var liters = ""
}
and then a base realm object called Inventory Item Class that will represent them
class InvItemClass: Object {
#objc dynamic var name = ""
#objc dynamic var image = ""
#objc dynamic var itemType = ""
#objc dynamic var book: BookClass?
#objc dynamic var mug: MugClass?
#objc dynamic var card: CardClass?
}
then assume we want to store some books along with our mugs and cards (from the comments)
let book2001 = BookClass()
book2001.author = "Clarke"
let bookIRobot = BookClass()
bookIRobot.author = "Asimov"
let item0 = InvItemClass()
item0.name = "2001: A Space Odyssey"
item0.image = "Pic of Hal"
item0.itemType = "Book"
item0.book = book2001
let item1 = InvItemClass()
item1.name = "I, Robot"
item1.image = "Robot image"
item1.itemType = "Book"
item1.book = bookIRobot
do {
let realm = try Realm()
try! realm.write {
realm.add(item0)
realm.add(item1)
}
} catch let error as NSError {
print(error.localizedDescription)
}
From here, we can load all of the Inventory Item Objects as one set of objects (per the question) and take action depending on their type; for example, if want to load all items and print out just the ones that are books.
do {
let realm = try Realm()
let items = realm.objects(InvItemClass.self)
for item in items {
switch item.itemType {
case "Book":
let book = item.book
print(book?.author as! String)
case "Mug":
return
default:
return
}
}
} catch let error as NSError {
print(error.localizedDescription)
}
As it stands there isn't a generic 'one realm object fits all' solution, but this answer provides some level of generic-ness where a lot of different object types could be accessed via one main base object.
I have a Models class defined like this:
class BaseModel: Object {
var data: JSON = JSON.null
convenience init(_ data: JSON) {
self.init()
self.data = data
}
override static func ignoredProperties() -> [String] {
return ["data"]
}
}
class RecipeModel: BaseModel {
dynamic var title: String {
get { return data["fields"]["title"].stringValue }
set { self.title = newValue }
}
... more vars ...
var ingredients: List<IngredientsModel> {
get {
let ingredients = List<IngredientsModel>()
for item in data["fields"]["ingredients"] {
ingredients.append(IngredientsModel(item.1))
}
return ingredients
}
set { self.ingredients = newValue }
}
}
class IngredientsModel: BaseModel {
dynamic var text: String {
get { return data["text"].stringValue }
set { self.text = newValue }
}
... more vars ...
}
And I would like to use it something like this:
Api.shared.fetchAllEntries().call(onSuccess: {response in
print(response.json)
let realm = try! Realm()
try! realm.write {
realm.deleteAll()
}
for item in response.json["items"].arrayValue {
let recipe = RecipeModel(item)
try! realm.write {
realm.add(recipe)
}
}
}, onError: {
print("error")
})
So basically the idea is to just pass the whole JSON to the initial RecipeModel class, and it should parse it out and create the objects I need in the Realm database. It works quite well except for the nested list of IngredientsModel. They do not get added to the realm database.
What I see as a potential problem is that I call self.init() before I call self.data in the convenience init, but I do not see any way to work around this. Do you guys please know how I could achieve that also the IngredientsModel would have its contents set up properly and I would have a list of ingredients in the RecipeModel?
Your current implementation doesn't work, because you are not calling the getter/setter of ingredients in the init method of RecipeModel and hence the IngredientsModel instances are never persisted in Realm.
Moreover, using a computed property as a one-to-many relationship (Realm List) is a really bad idea, especially if you are parsing the results inside the getter for this property. Every time you call the getter of ingredients, you create new model objects instead of just accessing the existing ones that are already stored in Realm, but you are never deleting the old ones. If you were actually saving the IngredientsModel instances to Realm (which you don't do at the moment as mentioned above) you would see that your database is full of duplicate entries.
Your whole approach seems really suboptimal. You shouldn't store the unparsed data object in your model class and use computed properties to parse it. You should parse it when initializing your models and shouldn't store the unparsed data at all. You can use the ObjectMapper library for creating Realm objects straight away from the JSON response.
I'm new in Realm and I tried to add an Array as I did with strings and I ended up with some errors. So after a little search I found out a solution:
class Sensors : Object {
dynamic var name = ""
dynamic var message = ""
var topic: [String] {
get {
return _backingNickNames.map { $0.stringValue }
}
set {
_backingNickNames.removeAll()
_backingNickNames.append(objectsIn: newValue.map({ RealmString(value: [$0]) }))
}
}
let _backingNickNames = List<RealmString>()
override static func ignoredProperties() -> [String] {
return ["topic"]
}
}
class RealmString: Object {
dynamic var stringValue = ""
}
This is working very good, now I want to add another array inside this class.
If someone knows any other ways to add arrays with realm please share it.
Thanks in advance
As a general rule it's way more efficient to use the one-to-many relationships provided by Realm instead of trying to emulate them by using arrays (Realm's collections are lazy, the objects contained are instantiated only when needed as opposed to plain Swift arrays).
In your case, if I understand correctly what you're trying to do, you want to add [RealmString] Swift arrays to the _backingNickNames list.
Why not use the append(objectsIn:) method of Realm's List class (see here), like this:
// Dog model
class Dog: Object {
dynamic var name = ""
dynamic var owner: Person?
}
// Person model
class Person: Object {
dynamic var name = ""
dynamic var birthdate = NSDate(timeIntervalSince1970: 1)
let dogs = List<Dog>()
}
let jim = Person()
let dog1 = Dog()
let dog2 = Dog()
// here is where the magic happens
jim.dogs.append(objectsIn: [dog1, dog2])
If you want to do the opposite (convert from a List to an Array) just do :
let dogsArray = Array(jim.dogs)
• • • • • • • •
Back to your own posted solution, you could easily refactor the model to accommodate this. Each Sensor object could have several Topic and several Message objects attached.
Just ditch the message and topic computed properties and rename topicV and messageV to topics and messages respectively. Also rename RealmString to Topic and RealmString1 to Message.
Now, you could easily iterate through the, say, topics attached to a sensor like this :
for topic in sensor1.topics { ... }
Or if you want to attach a message to a sensor you could do something like this (don't forget to properly add the newly created object to the DB first):
let message1 = Message()
message1.stringValue = "Some text"
sensor2.messages.append(message1)
So, no need to use intermediary Swift Arrays.
After testing I managed to add another array like that:
class Sensors : Object {
dynamic var type = ""
dynamic var name = ""
dynamic var badge = 0
var topic: [String] {
get {
return topicV.map { $0.stringValue }
}
set {
topicV.removeAll()
topicV.append(objectsIn: newValue.map({ RealmString(value: [$0]) }))
}
}
var message: [String] {
get {
return messageV.map { $0.stringValue1 }
}
set {
messageV.removeAll()
messageV.append(objectsIn: newValue.map({ RealmString1(value: [$0]) }))
}
}
let topicV = List<RealmString>()
let messageV = List<RealmString1>()
override static func ignoredProperties() -> [String] {
return ["topic", "message"]
}
}
class RealmString: Object {
dynamic var stringValue = ""
}
class RealmString1: Object {
dynamic var stringValue1 = ""
}
What bogdanf has said, and the way you've implemented it are both correct.
Basic value types aside, Realm can only store references to singular Realm Object objects, as well as arrays of Objects using the List type. As such, if you want to save an array of types, it's necessary to encapsulate any basic types you want to save (like a String here) in a convenience Realm Object.
Like bogdanf said, it's not recommended to convert Realm Lists to standard Swift arrays and back again, since you lose the advantages of Realm's lazy-loading features (which can cause both performance and memory issues), but memory issues can at least be mitigated by enclosing the code copying data out of Realm in an #autoreleasepool block.
class MyObject: Object {
dynamic var childObject: MyObject?
let objectList = List<MyObject>()
}
So in review, it's best practice to work directly with Realm List objects whenever possible, and to use #autoreleasepool any time you do actually want to loop through every child object in a Realm. :)
I have stop which have many directions. I've managed to do it using function 'linkingObjects' but since last update it's deprecated and I should use object 'LinkingObjects'.
Stop
class Stop: Object {
dynamic var name:String = ""
var directions = List<Direction>()
override static func primaryKey() -> String? {
return "name"
}
}
Old Direction
class Direction: Object {
dynamic var tag:String = ""
var stop:Stop? {
return linkingObjects(Stop.self, forProperty: "directions").first
}
}
When I apply my previous approach to new object then I always get nil
New Direction with nil returned by LinkingObjects
class Direction: Object {
dynamic var tag:String = ""
let stop = LinkingObjects(fromType: Stop.self, property: "directions").first //always return nil
}
But here I'm getting array with one element. So it works as it should.
New Direction with nil returned by LinkingObjects
class Direction: Object {
dynamic var tag:String = ""
let stops = LinkingObjects(fromType: Stop.self, property: "directions")
}
Question
Is there other way to use 'LinkingObjects' rather than this last example because using in every time 'direction.stop.first?.name' instead of 'direction.stop?.stop'?
Of course, I could use in 'direction' function that will take always pick first element in 'stops' but maybe I don't have to.
UPDATE
In meanwhile I’m using this. This isn’t ideal solution, but works.
private let stops:LinkingObjects<Stop> = LinkingObjects(fromType: Stop.self, property: "directions")
var stop:Stop? {
return self.stops.first
}
The solution you came up with yourself for now is the best what you could do.
We discussed whether we should expose any other API for singular backlinks, but as there is no way to enforce their multiplicity on the data storage layer, it didn't made sense so far. In addition, you would still need a wrapper object, so that we can propagate updates. For that reason a unified way to retrieve the value via LinkedObjects seemed to be the way so far.
What about specifiying the relation the other way around?
Specify the connection on the 'one'-side
Do a query in the getter on the 'many'-side:
So it should read like this:
class Child: Object {
dynamic var name:String = ""
dynamic var parent:Parent? = nil
}
class Parent: Object {
dynamic var name:String = ""
var children:Results<Child>? {
return realm?.objects(Child.self).filter(NSPredicate(format: "parent == %#", self))
}
}