How to unit test private members of a class in swift? [duplicate] - ios

This question already has answers here:
Swift - Unit testing private variables and methods
(8 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
I have a class with few public and private members like below :
public class ReviewManager {
public static let shared = ReviewManager()
private static let startDateKey = "StartDate"
private static let popupLastSeenKey = "LastSeen"
private static let lastVersionPromptedForReview = "lastVersionPromptedForReview"
private(set) var startDate: Date {
get {
Date()
}
set { }
}
private(set) var lastPopupDate: Date? {
get {
}
set {
}
}
private(set) var lastVersionPromptedForReview: String {
get {
}
set {
}
}
private(set) var appCurrentVersion: String {
get {
// Get the current bundle version for the app
guard let currentVersion = Bundle.main.object(forInfoDictionaryKey: "CFBundleShortVersionString") as? String
else {
logError("Expected to find a bundle version in the info dictionary")
return ""
}
return currentVersion
}
set { }
}
private func requestReview() {
SKStoreReviewController.requestReview()
lastPopupDate = Date()
lastVersionPromptedForReview = appCurrentVersion
}
public func requestReviewIfPossible() {
let today = Date()
if lastPopupDate == nil {
if allowedToPresentToday() && allowedToPresentForThisVersion() {
requestReview()
}
} else {
if let lastPopupDate = lastPopupDate {
if allowedToPresentToday() && allowedToPresentForThisVersion() {
requestReview()
}
}
}
}
private func allowedToPresentToday() -> Bool {
let calendar = Calendar(identifier: .gregorian)
let today = Date()
let components = calendar.dateComponents([.weekday], from: today!)
return components.weekday == 5 || components.weekday == 6
}
private func allowedToPresentForThisVersion() -> Bool {
let allowedToShowForThisVersion = (appCurrentVersion != lastVersionPromptedForReview) ? true : false
return allowedToShowForThisVersion
}
}
Now I want to write Unit tests for all the private functions in this class. I can access private properties in this class by making access modifier as
private(set)
But private functions can not be accessed outside the class.
Is there any way to unit test private functions in Swift ?

Completely echo #luk2302, in that you should be testing the public interface. But if you feel you really must, perhaps consider creating a wrapper function around the private function to expose it. You could make this compile conditionally, say in this example only in DEBUG mode, so it doesn't pollute your production code:
class MyClass {
private func myPrivateFunc() -> Void {
print("Hello")
}
}
#if DEBUG
extension MyClass {
func myPublicFunc() -> Void {
myPrivateFunc()
}
}
#endif
let myClass = MyClass()
myClass.myPublicFunc()

Related

Swift - toggle model to readonly momentarily

I have a phone number model which looks like this:
import UIKit
import Foundation
struct PhoneValidation : OptionSet {
let rawValue: Int
static let phoneInValid = PhoneValidation(rawValue: 1 << 0)
static let phoneValid = PhoneValidation(rawValue: 1 << 1)
static let smsValidationAttempted = PhoneValidation(rawValue: 1 << 2)
static let smsValidationFailed = PhoneValidation(rawValue: 1 << 3)
static let smsValidationSuccessful = PhoneValidation(rawValue: 1 << 4) // OTP is successfully validated in backend. The field should be non-editable in this duration
static let smsValidationOTPTriggered = PhoneValidation(rawValue: 1 << 5) // OTP validation triggered. The field should be non-editable in this duration
}
class PhonesViewModel: NSCopying {
public var phoneType: PhoneNumberType = PhoneNumberType.mobile
public var phone: String?
public var code: String?
public var countryCode: String?
public var isValid : PhoneValidation?
func copy(with zone: NSZone? = nil) -> Any {
let copy = PhonesViewModel()
copy.phoneType = phoneType
copy.phone = phone
copy.code = code
copy.countryCode = countryCode
copy.isValid = isValid
return copy
}
}
As you can see above the phone model can transition between different states. The SMS validation is available for few countries and for few it is not applicable. So, I plan on setting smsValidationOTPTriggered state when SMS validation is applicable for a country and while the validation is in progress.
What I need here is, while the states smsValidationOTPTriggered or smsValidationSuccessful are set I would not want any module of the application to modify the values(phoneType, phone, code, countryCode) of the model. In other words, I would like the model to switch to a read-only mode while these 2 states are set in model and would like the module to be informed with an error or exception when a modification is attempted.
Is there a best practice already available for what I am trying to achieve here? I have searched before raising this question but did not find any. How can I achieve this?
Thanks,
Raj Pawan Gumdal
How about something like this, I think its better to use property wrappers for your case! The below is not an exact solution but can modify/change to accommodate your need
import UIKit
enum PhoneNumberType {
case mobile
}
enum PhoneValidation {
case phoneInValid
case phoneValid
case smsValidationAttempted
case smsValidationFailed
case smsValidationSuccessful
case smsValidationOTPTriggered
}
struct PhonesViewModel {
public var phoneType: PhoneNumberType = PhoneNumberType.mobile
public var phone: String?
public var code: String?
public var countryCode: String?
public var phoneValidation : PhoneValidation?
func validate(value: [PhoneValidation]) -> Bool {
//add proper check here
return false
}
}
#propertyWrapper
struct Wrapper {
private(set) var value: PhonesViewModel? = nil
var validators: [PhoneValidation] = []
var wrappedValue: PhonesViewModel? {
get { value }
set {
if let model = newValue, model.validate(value: validators) {
value = newValue
print("Value assigned")
} else {
print("Value not assigned")
}
}
}
}
struct SomeOtherClass {
#Wrapper(validators: [PhoneValidation.phoneInValid])
var model: PhonesViewModel?
}
var a = SomeOtherClass()
a.model = PhonesViewModel()
a.model = PhonesViewModel()
You can use a technique with the name "popsicle immutability". An object is initially mutable, but can be "frozen". Modifications for frozen objects are forbidden. In your case PhonesViewModel become frozen when isValid property have value smsValidationOTPTriggered or smsValidationSuccessful.
Let's add Freezable protocol for requirements to objects that can become immutable and conforming for PhonesViewModel:
protocol Freezable: class {
var isFrozen: Bool { get }
}
extension PhonesViewModel: Freezable {
var isFrozen: Bool {
isValid == .smsValidationOTPTriggered || isValid == .smsValidationSuccessful
}
}
Now we must add validation for isFrozen value when a property is assigned. It can be added in property observers like:
...
public var phone: String? {
didSet {
validate()
}
}
...
private func validate() {
assert(!isFrozen)
}
Or using property wrapper:
#propertyWrapper
struct Guarded<Value> {
private var value: Value
init(wrappedValue: Value) {
value = wrappedValue
}
#available(*, unavailable)
var wrappedValue: Value {
get { fatalError("only works on instance properties of classes that conforms to Freezable protocol") }
set { fatalError("only works on instance properties of classes that conforms to Freezable protocol") }
}
static subscript<EnclosingSelf: Freezable>(
_enclosingInstance object: EnclosingSelf,
wrapped wrappedKeyPath: ReferenceWritableKeyPath<EnclosingSelf, Value>,
storage storageKeyPath: ReferenceWritableKeyPath<EnclosingSelf, Self>
) -> Value {
get {
object[keyPath: storageKeyPath].value
}
set {
precondition(!object.isFrozen, "Object \(object) is frozen! Modifications are forbidden")
object[keyPath: storageKeyPath].value = newValue
}
}
}
So your class will look like:
class PhonesViewModel: NSCopying {
#Guarded
public var phoneType: PhoneNumberType = PhoneNumberType.mobile
#Guarded
public var phone: String?
#Guarded
public var code: String?
#Guarded
public var countryCode: String?
#Guarded
public var isValid : PhoneValidation?
func copy(with zone: NSZone? = nil) -> Any {
let copy = PhonesViewModel()
copy.phoneType = phoneType
copy.phone = phone
copy.code = code
copy.countryCode = countryCode
copy.isValid = isValid
return copy
}
}

Instantiating classes stored in metatype Dictionary

I've followed the solution at Make a Swift dictionary where the key is "Type"? to create dictionaries that can use a class type as keys.
What I want to do is: I have one dictionary that should store class types with their class type (aka metatype) as keys, too:
class MyScenario {
static var metatype:Metatype<MyScenario> {
return Metatype(self)
}
}
var scenarioClasses:[Metatype<MyScenario>: MyScenario.Type] = [:]
Then I have methods to register and execute scenarios:
public func registerScenario(scenarioID:MyScenario.Type) {
if (scenarioClasses[scenarioID.metatype] == nil) {
scenarioClasses[scenarioID.metatype] = scenarioID
}
}
public func executeScenario(scenarioID:MyScenario.Type) {
if let scenarioClass = scenarioClasses[scenarioID.metatype] {
let scenario = scenarioClass()
}
}
... Problem is in the last line:
Constructing an object of class type 'MyScenario' with a metatype
value must use a 'required' initializer.
It looks like the compiler is confused at that point since I cannot use 'required' at that assignment. Does anyone have an idea how I would have to instantiate the scenarioClass in executeScenario()?
This must do the job.
import Foundation
struct Metatype<T> : Hashable
{
static func ==(lhs: Metatype, rhs: Metatype) -> Bool
{
return lhs.base == rhs.base
}
let base: T.Type
init(_ base: T.Type)
{
self.base = base
}
var hashValue: Int
{
return ObjectIdentifier(base).hashValue
}
}
public class MyScenario
{
var p: String
public required init()
{
self.p = "any"
}
static var metatype:Metatype<MyScenario>
{
return Metatype(self)
}
}
var scenarioClasses:[Metatype<MyScenario>: MyScenario.Type] = [:]
public func registerScenario(scenarioID:MyScenario.Type)
{
if (scenarioClasses[scenarioID.metatype] == nil)
{
scenarioClasses[scenarioID.metatype] = scenarioID
}
}
public func executeScenario(scenarioID:MyScenario.Type)
{
if let scenarioClass = scenarioClasses[scenarioID.metatype]
{
let scenario = scenarioClass.init()
print("\(scenario.p)")
}
}
// Register a new scenario
registerScenario(scenarioID: MyScenario.self)
// Execute
executeScenario(scenarioID: MyScenario.self)
// Should print "any"

How to make a Swift Class Singleton instance thread safe?

I have a singleton class as so:
class Database {
static let instance:Database = Database()
private var db: Connection?
private init(){
do {
db = try Connection("\(path)/SalesPresenterDatabase.sqlite3")
}catch{print(error)}
}
}
Now I access this class using Database.instance.xxxxxx to perform a function within the class. However when I access the instance from another thread it throws bizarre results as if its trying to create another instance. Should I be referencing the instance in the same thread?
To clarify the bizarre results show database I/o errors because of two instances trying to access the db at once
Update
please see this question for more info on the database code: Using transactions to insert is throwing errors Sqlite.swift
class var shareInstance: ClassName {
get {
struct Static {
static var instance: ClassName? = nil
static var token: dispatch_once_t = 0
}
dispatch_once(&Static.token, {
Static.instance = ClassName()
})
return Static.instance!
}
}
USE: let object:ClassName = ClassName.shareInstance
Swift 3.0
class ClassName {
static let sharedInstance: ClassName = { ClassName()} ()
}
USE: let object:ClassName = ClassName.shareInstance
In Swift 3.0 add a private init to prevent others from using the default () initializer.
class ClassName {
static let sharedInstance = ClassName()
private init() {} //This prevents others from using the default '()' initializer for this class.
}
Singleton thread class.
final public class SettingsThreadSafe {
public static let shared = SettingsThreadSafe()
private let concurrentQueue = DispatchQueue(label: "com.appname.typeOfQueueAndUse", attributes: .concurrent)
private var settings: [String: Any] = ["Theme": "Dark",
"MaxConsurrentDownloads": 4]
private init() {}
public func string(forKey key: String) -> String? {
var result: String?
concurrentQueue.sync {
result = self.settings[key] as? String
}
return result
}
public func int(forKey key: String) -> Int? {
var result: Int?
concurrentQueue.sync {
result = self.settings[key] as? Int
}
return result
}
public func set(value: Any, forKey key: String) {
concurrentQueue.async( flags: .barrier ) {
self.settings[key] = value
}
}
}
Unit to test the singleton class.
func testConcurrentUsage() {
let concurrentQueue = DispatchQueue(label: "concurrentQueue", attributes: .concurrent)
let expect = expectation(description: "Using SettingsThreadSafe.shared from multiple threads shall succeed")
let callCount = 300
for callIndex in 1...callCount {
concurrentQueue.async {
SettingsThreadSafe.shared.set(value: callIndex, forKey: String(callIndex))
}
}
while SettingsThreadSafe.shared.int(forKey: String(callCount)) != callCount {
// nop
}
expect.fulfill()
waitForExpectations(timeout: 5) { (error) in
XCTAssertNil(error, "Test expectation failed")
}
}

iOS Swift: Array of Objects conforming to a Protocol: How to check if array contains

I'm trying to implement an image downloader class. It's a singleton implementation. The idea is to ask the instance to download an image and register as an observer for that image download. This is what I came up with so far:
public protocol ImageDownloaderDelegate {
func imageDownloadFinished(success: Bool)
}
public class ImageDownloader {
var list: [Int64] = []
var observer: [Int64:[ImageDownloaderDelegate]] = [:]
var downloading: Bool = false
public func downloadImageWithId(immutableId: Int64, delegate: ImageDownloaderDelegate) {
// Add Id to download list
if (!contains(list, immutableId)) {
list.append(immutableId)
}
// Add Observer
var observerList = observer[immutableId]
if (observerList == nil) {
observerList = [delegate]
} else if (!contains(observerList, delegate)) {
observerList!.append(delegate)
}
observer[immutableId] = observerList
// Start to download
if (!downloading) {
self.downloadNextImage()
}
}
private func downloadNextImage() {
...
}
/// A shared instance of the class
public class var defaultImageDownloader: ImageDownloader {
struct Singleton {
static let instance = ImageDownloader()
}
return Singleton.instance
}
}
I get the following error:
'ImageDownloaderDelegate' is not convertible to 'S.Generator.Element -> L'
Any help is much appreciated
You're not passing the correct arguments to the contains function, which expects a collection and a predicate (closure).
You need to do
public protocol ImageDownloaderDelegate : class {
func imageDownloadFinished(success: Bool)
}
public class ImageDownloader {
var list: [Int64] = []
var observer: [Int64:[ImageDownloaderDelegate]] = [:]
var downloading: Bool = false
public func downloadImageWithId(immutableId: Int64, delegate: ImageDownloaderDelegate) {
// Add Id to download list
if (!contains(list, immutableId)) {
list.append(immutableId)
}
// Add Observer
var observerList = observer[immutableId]
if (observerList == nil) {
observerList = [delegate]
} else if !contains(observerList!, { observer in observer === delegate }) {
observerList!.append(delegate)
}
observer[immutableId] = observerList
// Start to download
if (!downloading) {
self.downloadNextImage()
}
}
private func downloadNextImage() {
...
}
/// A shared instance of the class
public class var defaultImageDownloader: ImageDownloader {
struct Singleton {
static let instance = ImageDownloader()
}
return Singleton.instance
}
}

How to have stored properties in Swift, the same way I had on Objective-C?

I am switching an application from Objective-C to Swift, which I have a couple of categories with stored properties, for example:
#interface UIView (MyCategory)
- (void)alignToView:(UIView *)view
alignment:(UIViewRelativeAlignment)alignment;
- (UIView *)clone;
#property (strong) PFObject *xo;
#property (nonatomic) BOOL isAnimating;
#end
As Swift extensions don't accept stored properties like these, I don't know how to maintain the same structure as the Objc code. Stored properties are really important for my app and I believe Apple must have created some solution for doing it in Swift.
As said by jou, what I was looking for was actually using associated objects, so I did (in another context):
import Foundation
import QuartzCore
import ObjectiveC
extension CALayer {
var shapeLayer: CAShapeLayer? {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, "shapeLayer") as? CAShapeLayer
}
set(newValue) {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, "shapeLayer", newValue, UInt(OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN))
}
}
var initialPath: CGPathRef! {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, "initialPath") as CGPathRef
}
set {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, "initialPath", newValue, UInt(OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN))
}
}
}
But I get an EXC_BAD_ACCESS when doing:
class UIBubble : UIView {
required init(coder aDecoder: NSCoder) {
...
self.layer.shapeLayer = CAShapeLayer()
...
}
}
Any ideas?
As in Objective-C, you can't add stored property to existing classes. If you're extending an Objective-C class (UIView is definitely one), you can still use Associated Objects to emulate stored properties:
for Swift 1
import ObjectiveC
private var xoAssociationKey: UInt8 = 0
extension UIView {
var xo: PFObject! {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &xoAssociationKey) as? PFObject
}
set(newValue) {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, &xoAssociationKey, newValue, objc_AssociationPolicy(OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN))
}
}
}
The association key is a pointer that should be the unique for each association. For that, we create a private global variable and use it's memory address as the key with the & operator. See the Using Swift with Cocoa and Objective-C
on more details how pointers are handled in Swift.
UPDATED for Swift 2 and 3
import ObjectiveC
private var xoAssociationKey: UInt8 = 0
extension UIView {
var xo: PFObject! {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &xoAssociationKey) as? PFObject
}
set(newValue) {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, &xoAssociationKey, newValue, objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN)
}
}
}
UPDATED for Swift 4
In Swift 4, it's much more simple. The Holder struct will contain the private value that our computed property will expose to the world, giving the illusion of a stored property behaviour instead.
Source
extension UIViewController {
struct Holder {
static var _myComputedProperty:Bool = false
}
var myComputedProperty:Bool {
get {
return Holder._myComputedProperty
}
set(newValue) {
Holder._myComputedProperty = newValue
}
}
}
Associated objects API is a bit cumbersome to use. You can remove most of the boilerplate with a helper class.
public final class ObjectAssociation<T: AnyObject> {
private let policy: objc_AssociationPolicy
/// - Parameter policy: An association policy that will be used when linking objects.
public init(policy: objc_AssociationPolicy = .OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC) {
self.policy = policy
}
/// Accesses associated object.
/// - Parameter index: An object whose associated object is to be accessed.
public subscript(index: AnyObject) -> T? {
get { return objc_getAssociatedObject(index, Unmanaged.passUnretained(self).toOpaque()) as! T? }
set { objc_setAssociatedObject(index, Unmanaged.passUnretained(self).toOpaque(), newValue, policy) }
}
}
Provided that you can "add" a property to objective-c class in a more readable manner:
extension SomeType {
private static let association = ObjectAssociation<NSObject>()
var simulatedProperty: NSObject? {
get { return SomeType.association[self] }
set { SomeType.association[self] = newValue }
}
}
As for the solution:
extension CALayer {
private static let initialPathAssociation = ObjectAssociation<CGPath>()
private static let shapeLayerAssociation = ObjectAssociation<CAShapeLayer>()
var initialPath: CGPath! {
get { return CALayer.initialPathAssociation[self] }
set { CALayer.initialPathAssociation[self] = newValue }
}
var shapeLayer: CAShapeLayer? {
get { return CALayer.shapeLayerAssociation[self] }
set { CALayer.shapeLayerAssociation[self] = newValue }
}
}
So I think I found a method that works cleaner than the ones above because it doesn't require any global variables. I got it from here:
http://nshipster.com/swift-objc-runtime/
The gist is that you use a struct like so:
extension UIViewController {
private struct AssociatedKeys {
static var DescriptiveName = "nsh_DescriptiveName"
}
var descriptiveName: String? {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedKeys.DescriptiveName) as? String
}
set {
if let newValue = newValue {
objc_setAssociatedObject(
self,
&AssociatedKeys.DescriptiveName,
newValue as NSString?,
UInt(OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
)
}
}
}
}
UPDATE for Swift 2
private struct AssociatedKeys {
static var displayed = "displayed"
}
//this lets us check to see if the item is supposed to be displayed or not
var displayed : Bool {
get {
guard let number = objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedKeys.displayed) as? NSNumber else {
return true
}
return number.boolValue
}
set(value) {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self,&AssociatedKeys.displayed,NSNumber(bool: value),objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
The solution pointed out by jou doesn't support value types,
this works fine with them as well
Wrappers
import ObjectiveC
final class Lifted<T> {
let value: T
init(_ x: T) {
value = x
}
}
private func lift<T>(x: T) -> Lifted<T> {
return Lifted(x)
}
func setAssociatedObject<T>(object: AnyObject, value: T, associativeKey: UnsafePointer<Void>, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy) {
if let v: AnyObject = value as? AnyObject {
objc_setAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey, v, policy)
}
else {
objc_setAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey, lift(value), policy)
}
}
func getAssociatedObject<T>(object: AnyObject, associativeKey: UnsafePointer<Void>) -> T? {
if let v = objc_getAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey) as? T {
return v
}
else if let v = objc_getAssociatedObject(object, associativeKey) as? Lifted<T> {
return v.value
}
else {
return nil
}
}
A possible
Class extension (Example of usage):
extension UIView {
private struct AssociatedKey {
static var viewExtension = "viewExtension"
}
var referenceTransform: CGAffineTransform? {
get {
return getAssociatedObject(self, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.viewExtension)
}
set {
if let value = newValue {
setAssociatedObject(self, value: value, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.viewExtension, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
}
}
This is really such a great solution, I wanted to add another usage example that included structs and values that are not optionals. Also, the AssociatedKey values can be simplified.
struct Crate {
var name: String
}
class Box {
var name: String
init(name: String) {
self.name = name
}
}
extension UIViewController {
private struct AssociatedKey {
static var displayed: UInt8 = 0
static var box: UInt8 = 0
static var crate: UInt8 = 0
}
var displayed: Bool? {
get {
return getAssociatedObject(self, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.displayed)
}
set {
if let value = newValue {
setAssociatedObject(self, value: value, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.displayed, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
}
var box: Box {
get {
if let result:Box = getAssociatedObject(self, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.box) {
return result
} else {
let result = Box(name: "")
self.box = result
return result
}
}
set {
setAssociatedObject(self, value: newValue, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.box, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
var crate: Crate {
get {
if let result:Crate = getAssociatedObject(self, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.crate) {
return result
} else {
let result = Crate(name: "")
self.crate = result
return result
}
}
set {
setAssociatedObject(self, value: newValue, associativeKey: &AssociatedKey.crate, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
}
You can't define categories (Swift extensions) with new storage; any additional properties must be computed rather than stored. The syntax works for Objective C because #property in a category essentially means "I'll provide the getter and setter". In Swift, you'll need to define these yourself to get a computed property; something like:
extension String {
public var Foo : String {
get
{
return "Foo"
}
set
{
// What do you want to do here?
}
}
}
Should work fine. Remember, you can't store new values in the setter, only work with the existing available class state.
My $0.02. This code is written in Swift 2.0
extension CALayer {
private struct AssociatedKeys {
static var shapeLayer:CAShapeLayer?
}
var shapeLayer: CAShapeLayer? {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedKeys.shapeLayer) as? CAShapeLayer
}
set {
if let newValue = newValue {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedKeys.shapeLayer, newValue as CAShapeLayer?, objc_AssociationPolicy.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)
}
}
}
}
I have tried many solutions, and found this is the only way to actually extend a class with extra variable parameters.
Why relying on objc runtime? I don't get the point. By using something like the following you will achieve almost the identical behaviour of a stored property, by using only a pure Swift approach:
extension UIViewController {
private static var _myComputedProperty = [String:Bool]()
var myComputedProperty:Bool {
get {
let tmpAddress = String(format: "%p", unsafeBitCast(self, to: Int.self))
return UIViewController._myComputedProperty[tmpAddress] ?? false
}
set(newValue) {
let tmpAddress = String(format: "%p", unsafeBitCast(self, to: Int.self))
UIViewController._myComputedProperty[tmpAddress] = newValue
}
}
}
I prefer doing code in pure Swift and not rely on Objective-C heritage. Because of this I wrote pure Swift solution with two advantages and two disadvantages.
Advantages:
Pure Swift code
Works on classes and completions or more specifically on Any object
Disadvantages:
Code should call method willDeinit() to release objects linked to specific class instance to avoid memory leaks
You cannot make extension directly to UIView for this exact example because var frame is extension to UIView, not part of class.
EDIT:
import UIKit
var extensionPropertyStorage: [NSObject: [String: Any]] = [:]
var didSetFrame_ = "didSetFrame"
extension UILabel {
override public var frame: CGRect {
get {
return didSetFrame ?? CGRectNull
}
set {
didSetFrame = newValue
}
}
var didSetFrame: CGRect? {
get {
return extensionPropertyStorage[self]?[didSetFrame_] as? CGRect
}
set {
var selfDictionary = extensionPropertyStorage[self] ?? [String: Any]()
selfDictionary[didSetFrame_] = newValue
extensionPropertyStorage[self] = selfDictionary
}
}
func willDeinit() {
extensionPropertyStorage[self] = nil
}
}
With Obj-c Categories you can only add methods, not instance variables.
In you example you have used #property as a shortcut to adding getter and setter method declarations. You still need to implement those methods.
Similarly in Swift you can add use extensions to add instance methods, computed properties etc. but not stored properties.
Notice: after further analyzing, the code below works fine, but does not release the view object, so if I can find a way around it I'll edit the answer. meanwhile, read the comments.
How about storing static map to class that is extending like this :
extension UIView {
struct Holder {
static var _padding:[UIView:UIEdgeInsets] = [:]
}
var padding : UIEdgeInsets {
get{ return UIView.Holder._padding[self] ?? .zero}
set { UIView.Holder._padding[self] = newValue }
}
}
I also get an EXC_BAD_ACCESS problem.The value in objc_getAssociatedObject() and objc_setAssociatedObject() should be an Object. And the objc_AssociationPolicy should match the Object.
I tried using objc_setAssociatedObject as mentioned in a few of the answers here, but after failing with it a few times I stepped back and realized there is no reason I need that. Borrowing from a few of the ideas here, I came up with this code which simply stores an array of whatever my extra data is (MyClass in this example) indexed by the object I want to associate it with:
class MyClass {
var a = 1
init(a: Int)
{
self.a = a
}
}
extension UIView
{
static var extraData = [UIView: MyClass]()
var myClassData: MyClass? {
get {
return UIView.extraData[self]
}
set(value) {
UIView.extraData[self] = value
}
}
}
// Test Code: (Ran in a Swift Playground)
var view1 = UIView()
var view2 = UIView()
view1.myClassData = MyClass(a: 1)
view2.myClassData = MyClass(a: 2)
print(view1.myClassData?.a)
print(view2.myClassData?.a)
Here is simplified and more expressive solution. It works for both value and reference types. The approach of lifting is taken from #HepaKKes answer.
Association code:
import ObjectiveC
final class Lifted<T> {
let value: T
init(_ x: T) {
value = x
}
}
private func lift<T>(_ x: T) -> Lifted<T> {
return Lifted(x)
}
func associated<T>(to base: AnyObject,
key: UnsafePointer<UInt8>,
policy: objc_AssociationPolicy = .OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN,
initialiser: () -> T) -> T {
if let v = objc_getAssociatedObject(base, key) as? T {
return v
}
if let v = objc_getAssociatedObject(base, key) as? Lifted<T> {
return v.value
}
let lifted = Lifted(initialiser())
objc_setAssociatedObject(base, key, lifted, policy)
return lifted.value
}
func associate<T>(to base: AnyObject, key: UnsafePointer<UInt8>, value: T, policy: objc_AssociationPolicy = .OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN) {
if let v: AnyObject = value as AnyObject? {
objc_setAssociatedObject(base, key, v, policy)
}
else {
objc_setAssociatedObject(base, key, lift(value), policy)
}
}
Example of usage:
1) Create extension and associate properties to it. Let's use both value and reference type properties.
extension UIButton {
struct Keys {
static fileprivate var color: UInt8 = 0
static fileprivate var index: UInt8 = 0
}
var color: UIColor {
get {
return associated(to: self, key: &Keys.color) { .green }
}
set {
associate(to: self, key: &Keys.color, value: newValue)
}
}
var index: Int {
get {
return associated(to: self, key: &Keys.index) { -1 }
}
set {
associate(to: self, key: &Keys.index, value: newValue)
}
}
}
2) Now you can use just as regular properties:
let button = UIButton()
print(button.color) // UIExtendedSRGBColorSpace 0 1 0 1 == green
button.color = .black
print(button.color) // UIExtendedGrayColorSpace 0 1 == black
print(button.index) // -1
button.index = 3
print(button.index) // 3
More details:
Lifting is needed for wrapping value types.
Default associated object behavior is retain. If you want to learn more about associated objects, I'd recommend checking this article.
if you are looking to set a custom string attribute to a UIView, this is how I did it on Swift 4
Create a UIView extension
extension UIView {
func setStringValue(value: String, key: String) {
layer.setValue(value, forKey: key)
}
func stringValueFor(key: String) -> String? {
return layer.value(forKey: key) as? String
}
}
To use this extension
let key = "COLOR"
let redView = UIView()
// To set
redView.setStringAttribute(value: "Red", key: key)
// To read
print(redView.stringValueFor(key: key)) // Optional("Red")
In PURE SWIFT with WEAK reference handling
import Foundation
import UIKit
extension CustomView {
// can make private
static let storedProperties = WeakDictionary<UIView, Properties>()
struct Properties {
var url: String = ""
var status = false
var desc: String { "url: \(url), status: \(status)" }
}
var properties: Properties {
get {
return CustomView.storedProperties.get(forKey: self) ?? Properties()
}
set {
CustomView.storedProperties.set(forKey: self, object: newValue)
}
}
}
var view: CustomView? = CustomView()
print("1 print", view?.properties.desc ?? "nil")
view?.properties.url = "abc"
view?.properties.status = true
print("2 print", view?.properties.desc ?? "nil")
view = nil
WeakDictionary.swift
import Foundation
private class WeakHolder<T: AnyObject>: Hashable {
weak var object: T?
let hash: Int
init(object: T) {
self.object = object
hash = ObjectIdentifier(object).hashValue
}
func hash(into hasher: inout Hasher) {
hasher.combine(hash)
}
static func ==(lhs: WeakHolder, rhs: WeakHolder) -> Bool {
return lhs.hash == rhs.hash
}
}
class WeakDictionary<T1: AnyObject, T2> {
private var dictionary = [WeakHolder<T1>: T2]()
func set(forKey: T1, object: T2?) {
dictionary[WeakHolder(object: forKey)] = object
}
func get(forKey: T1) -> T2? {
let obj = dictionary[WeakHolder(object: forKey)]
return obj
}
func forEach(_ handler: ((key: T1, value: T2)) -> Void) {
dictionary.forEach {
if let object = $0.key.object, let value = dictionary[$0.key] {
handler((object, value))
}
}
}
func clean() {
var removeList = [WeakHolder<T1>]()
dictionary.forEach {
if $0.key.object == nil {
removeList.append($0.key)
}
}
removeList.forEach {
dictionary[$0] = nil
}
}
}
Another example with using Objective-C associated objects and computed properties for Swift 3 and Swift 4
import CoreLocation
extension CLLocation {
private struct AssociatedKeys {
static var originAddress = "originAddress"
static var destinationAddress = "destinationAddress"
}
var originAddress: String? {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedKeys.originAddress) as? String
}
set {
if let newValue = newValue {
objc_setAssociatedObject(
self,
&AssociatedKeys.originAddress,
newValue as NSString?,
.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC
)
}
}
}
var destinationAddress: String? {
get {
return objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &AssociatedKeys.destinationAddress) as? String
}
set {
if let newValue = newValue {
objc_setAssociatedObject(
self,
&AssociatedKeys.destinationAddress,
newValue as NSString?,
.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC
)
}
}
}
}
First, Associated Objects should be the best right solution for the extended stored properties, because it comes from the Objective-C runtime, this is a great powerful feature that we should use before there are other native features of Swift language.
You should always aware that the associated objects will be released after there are no other objects to retain them, including swift objects, so don't use custom containers to retain the target values which won't be released automatically.
Second, for those additional associated key structure definitions, the core functions just need a UnsafeRawPointer for that, actually there is another best choice for that, #function is a static string which generated when compiling the source code, it also has its own address to use.
So, here is it:
var status: Bool? {
get { objc_getAssociatedObject(self, #function) as? Bool }
set { objc_setAssociatedObject(self, #function, newValue, .OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN_NONATOMIC)}
}
Build for swift 5.
Last, keep in mind the object type with the association policy.
I tried to store properties by using objc_getAssociatedObject, objc_setAssociatedObject, without any luck. My goal was create extension for UITextField, to validate text input characters length.
Following code works fine for me. Hope this will help someone.
private var _min: Int?
private var _max: Int?
extension UITextField {
#IBInspectable var minLength: Int {
get {
return _min ?? 0
}
set {
_min = newValue
}
}
#IBInspectable var maxLength: Int {
get {
return _max ?? 1000
}
set {
_max = newValue
}
}
func validation() -> (valid: Bool, error: String) {
var valid: Bool = true
var error: String = ""
guard let text = self.text else { return (true, "") }
if text.characters.count < minLength {
valid = false
error = "Textfield should contain at least \(minLength) characters"
}
if text.characters.count > maxLength {
valid = false
error = "Textfield should not contain more then \(maxLength) characters"
}
if (text.characters.count < minLength) && (text.characters.count > maxLength) {
valid = false
error = "Textfield should contain at least \(minLength) characters\n"
error = "Textfield should not contain more then \(maxLength) characters"
}
return (valid, error)
}
}
Why not just do something like this, i see other solutions are way out of the small need.
private var optionalID: String {
UUID().uuidString
}
Here is an alternative that works also
public final class Storage : AnyObject {
var object:Any?
public init(_ object:Any) {
self.object = object
}
}
extension Date {
private static let associationMap = NSMapTable<NSString, AnyObject>()
private struct Keys {
static var Locale:NSString = "locale"
}
public var locale:Locale? {
get {
if let storage = Date.associationMap.object(forKey: Keys.Locale) {
return (storage as! Storage).object as? Locale
}
return nil
}
set {
if newValue != nil {
Date.associationMap.setObject(Storage(newValue), forKey: Keys.Locale)
}
}
}
}
var date = Date()
date.locale = Locale(identifier: "pt_BR")
print( date.locale )
I found this solution more practical
UPDATED for Swift 3
extension UIColor {
static let graySpace = UIColor.init(red: 50/255, green: 50/255, blue: 50/255, alpha: 1.0)
static let redBlood = UIColor.init(red: 102/255, green: 0/255, blue: 0/255, alpha: 1.0)
static let redOrange = UIColor.init(red: 204/255, green: 17/255, blue: 0/255, alpha: 1.0)
func alpha(value : CGFloat) -> UIColor {
var r = CGFloat(0), g = CGFloat(0), b = CGFloat(0), a = CGFloat(0)
self.getRed(&r, green: &g, blue: &b, alpha: &a)
return UIColor(red: r, green: g, blue: b, alpha: value)
}
}
...then in your code
class gameController: UIViewController {
#IBOutlet var game: gameClass!
override func viewDidLoad() {
self.view.backgroundColor = UIColor.graySpace
}
}

Resources