How can a buffered replay subject be implemented in ReactiveSwift?
I've looked at replayLazily(upTo:) operator of SignalProducer, and also the pipe() function of the Signal type, however I can't see a straightforward way of creating something equivalent to Rx ReplaySubject.
This brings up the following questions as well:
ReactiveSwift implements Subject with Signal.pipe(), however you can't specify a buffer for the pipe the same way you can for a Rx ReplaySubject. Are there any workarounds?
replayLazily(upTo:) operator is missing from the Signal type. I guess this is not so bad since you can create a SignalProducer from a Signal. But why does Signal not have the same operator?
Has anyone encountered this problem before? Or am I missing something?
Any help would be much appreciated.
The Signal docs say:
An observer of a Signal will see the exact same sequence of events as all other observers. In other words, events will be sent to all observers at the same time.
This is in contrast to producers, which create a new signal each time they are started, which means it's possible for each observer to see different events.
The buffering scenario requires each observer to receive a list of current values in the buffer upon subscription, and other observers should not receive these values each time a new observer is added. Therefore, each observer needs their own signal, and that means the buffering mechanism must be implemented as a producer which can create a new signal for each subscriber.
There's a good discussion from 2016 when replayLazily was added that hopefully clarifies the thinking behind the operator and why it absolutely can't be a part of Signal.
Related
What is the difference between PublishSubject and BehaviorRelay
I think it would make sense to first define the difference between PublishSubject and BehaviorSubject. Both are observers and subscribers at the same time, meaning they can receive events and be subscribed to. Where they differ is:
PublishSubject
Starts empty
Only emits new values to subscribers
BehaviorSubject
Needs a starting value
Replays the last value to new subscribers
Once we get this out of the way, the BehaviorRelay is easy and the doc says:
BehaviorRelay is a wrapper for BehaviorSubject.
Unlike BehaviorSubject it can't terminate with error or completed.
In other words, Relay won't terminate.
Reference: http://reactivex.io/documentation/subject.html
I don't understand the workings of a DispatchQueue and wanted to learn more about how they implement the foundational queueing theory requirements. I tried to inspect a queue using:
dump(DispatchQueue.global())
And this gave this output:
- <OS_dispatch_queue_global: com.apple.root.default-qos[0x10c041f00] = { xref = -2147483648, ref = -2147483648, sref = 1, target = [0x0], width = 0xfff, state = 0x0060000000000000, in-barrier}> #0
- super: OS_dispatch_queue
- super: OS_dispatch_object
- super: OS_object
- super: NSObject
I got that the label is com.apple.root.default-qos, and this is specified in the Apple docs and the class is the packaged OS_dispatch_queue_global. I understand qos is queryable on the queue itself and that makes sense as well. Width I think just means the allocated memory size.
What I don't understand are the relevances of xref, ref and sref, I think they are internal ids for the queues but I am not sure. I think they are related to fundamental queueing concepts (multithreading came to mind) but would be great to hone into this in more detail.
Is the autoreleaseFrequency hidden from this debug description? Also, what does in-barrier = 0 mean? I tried creating a custom queue and this was replaced by in-flight = 0.. so confused about that as well.
Any ideas on how these undocumented variables relate to queueing theory? I think these are undocumented internals of the API, so any educated and justified explanations would be fine!
Thanks.
Why ask this?
This is a fairly broad question about the internals of grand-central-dispatch. I had difficulty understanding the dumped output because the original WWDC '10 videos and slides for GCD are no longer public. I also didn't know about the open-source libdispatch repo (thanks Rob). That needn't be a problem, but there are no related QAs on SO explaining the topic in detail.
Why GCD?
According to the WWDC '10 GCD transcripts (Thanks Rob), the main idea behind the API was to simplify the boilerplate associated with using the #selector API for multithreading.
Benefits of GCD
Apple released a new block-based API instead of going with function pointers, to also enable type-safe code that wouldn't crash if the block had the wrong type signature. Using typedefs also made code cleaner when used in function parameters, local variables and #property declarations. Queues allow you to capture code and some state as a chunk of data that get managed, enqueued and executed automatically behind the scenes.
The same session mentions how GCD manages low-level threads under the hood. It enqueues blocks to execute on threads when they need to be executed and then releases those threads (PThreads to be precise) when they are no longer referenced. GCD manages threads automatically and doesn't expose this API - when a DispatchWorkItem is dequeued GCD creates a thread for this block to execute on.
Drawbacks of performSelector
performSelector:onThread:withObject:waitUntilDone: has numerous drawbacks that suggest poor design for the modern challenges of concurrency, waiting, synchronisation. leads to pyramids of doom when switching threads in a func. Furthermore, the NSObject.performSelector family of threading methods are inflexible and limited:
No options to optimise for concurrent, initially inactive, or synchronisation on a particular thread. Unlike GCD.
Only selectors can be dispatched on to new threads (awful).
Lots of threads for a given function leads to messy code (pyramids of doom).
No support for queueing without a limited (at the time when GCD was announced in iOS 4) NSOperation API. NSOperations are a high-level, verbose API that became more powerful after incorporating elements of dispatch (low-level API that became GCD) in iOS 4.
Lots of bugs related to unhandled invalid Selector errors (type safety).
DispatchQueue internals
I believe the xref, ref and sref are internal registers that manage reference counts for automatic reference counting. GCD calls dispatch_retain and dispatch_release in most cases when needed, so we don't need to worry about releasing a queue after all its blocks have been executed. However, there were cases when a developer could call retain and release manually when trying to ensure the queue is retained even when not directly in use. These registers allow libDispatch to crash when release is called on a queue with a positive reference count, for better error handling.
When calling a block with DispatchQueue.global().async or similar, I believe this increments the reference count of that queue (xref and ref).
The variables in the question are not documented explicitly, but from what I can tell:
xref counts the number of external references to a general DispatchQueue.
ref counts the total number of references to a general DispatchQueue.
sref counts the number of references to API serial/concurrent/runloop queues, sources and mach channels (these need to be tracked differently as they are represented using different types).
in-barrier looks like an internal state flag (DispatchWorkItemFlag) to track whether new work items submitted to a concurrent queue should be scheduled or not. Only once the barrier work item finishes, the queue returns to scheduling work items that were submitted after the barrier. in-flight means that there is no barrier in force currently.
state is also not documented explicitly but I presume points to memory where the block can access variables from the scope where the block was scheduled.
I'm currently writing an iOS app in Swift, and I encountered the following problem: I have an object A. The problem is that while there is only one thread for the app (I didn't create separate threads), object A gets modified when
1) a certain NSTimer() triggers
2) a certain observeValueForKeyPath() triggers
3) a certain callback from Parse triggers.
From what I know, all the above three cases work kind of like a software interrupt. So as the code run, if NSTimer()/observeValueForKeyPath()/callback from Parse happens, current code gets interrupted and jumps to corresponding code. This is not a race condition (since just one thread), and I don't think something like this https://gist.github.com/Kaelten/7914a8128eca45f081b3 can solve this problem.
There is a specific function B called in all three cases to modify object A, so I'm thinking if I can make this function B atomic, then this problem is solved. Is there a way to do this?
You are making some incorrect assumptions. None of the things you mention interrupt the processor. 1 and 2 both operate synchronously. The timer won't fire or observeValueForKeyPath won't be called until your code finishes and your app services the event loop.
Atomic properties or other synchronization techniques are only meaningful for concurrent (multi-threaded) code. If memory serves, Atomic is only for properties, not other methods/functions.
I believe Parse uses completion blocks that are run on a background thread, in which case your #3 **is* using separate threads, even though you didn't realize that you were doing so. This is the only case in which you need to be worried about synchronization. In that case the simplest thing is to simply bracket your completion block code inside a call to dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue()), which makes all the code in the dispatch_async closure run on the main, avoiding concurrency issues entirely.
I have one signal that basically what it does is requesting for a configuration using NSRULSession. When I do a subscribeNext it does the request perfectly fine, however for the second time this request is not necessary anymore. How could I avoid it?
Your signal will do its work each time it is subscribed to unless you do something explicit to prevent that. It sounds like what you want here is the replayLast operator. This operator will cache the last emitted value of your signal and emit it when your signal is subscribed to again instead of redoing the initial work.
Read up on the 'replay' operators here:
http://spin.atomicobject.com/2014/06/29/replay-replaylast-replaylazily/
One time signal could be made via take: operator. You just need to pass an argument for the amount of times required to perform a signal. After such amount of executions this gateway will be closed completely and no more data will be passed in the subscribeNext: block. In your case this amount would be equal 1.
RACSignal *requestConfigurationSignal = ...
[[requestSignal
take:1]
subscribeNext:^(id value){
NSLog(#"Request in progress")
}]
Use a property and an action whose values are bound to that property. Then trigger the action only as needed to refresh the property's value.
I'm pretty new to FRP and I'm facing a problem:
I subscribe to an observable that triggers subscribeNext every second.
In the subscribeNext's block, I zip observables that execute asynchronous operations and in zip's completed block I perform an action with the result.
let signal: RACSignal
let asynchOperations: [RACSignal]
var val: AnyObject?
// subscribeNext is trigered every second
signal.subscribeNext {
let asynchOperations = // several RACSignal
// Perform asynchronous operations
RACSignal.zip(asynchOperations).subscribeNext({
val = $0
}, completed: {
// perform actions with `val`
})
}
I would like to stop the triggering of subscribeNext for signal (that is normally triggered every second) until completed (from the zip) has been reached.
Any suggestion?
It sounds like you want an RACCommand.
A command is an object that can perform asynchronous operations, but only have one instance of its operation running at a time. As soon as you tell a command to start execute:ing, it will become "disabled," and will automatically become enabled again when the operation completes.
(You can also make a command that's enabled based on other criteria than just "am I executing right now," but it doesn't sound like you need that here.)
Once you have that, you could derive a signal that "gates" the interval signal (for example, if:then:else: on the command's enabled signal toggling between RACSignal.empty and your actual signal -- I do this enough that I have a helper for it), or you can just check the canExecute property before invoking execute: in your subscription block.
Note: you're doing a slightly weird thing with your inner subscription there -- capturing the value and then dealing with the value on the completed block.
If you're doing that because it's more explicit, and you know that the signal will only send one value but you feel the need to encode that directly, then that's fine. I don't think it's standard, though -- if you have a signal that will only send one value, that's something that unfortunately can't be represented at the type level, but is nonetheless an assumption that you can make in your code (or at least, I find myself comfortable with that assumption. To each their own).
But if you're doing it for timing reasons, or because you actually only want the last value sent from the signal, you can use takeLast:1 instead to get a signal that will always send exactly one value right at the moment that the inner signal completes, and then only subscribe in the next block.
Slight word of warning: RACCommands are meant to be used from the main thread to back UI updates; if you want to use a command on a background thread you'll need to be explicit about the scheduler to deliver your signals on (check the docs for more details).
Another completely different approach to getting similar behavior is temporal recursion: perform your operation, then when it's complete, schedule the operation to occur again one second later, instead of having an ongoing timer.
This is slightly different as you'll always wait one second between operations, whereas in the current one you could be waiting anywhere between zero and one seconds, but if that's a not a problem then this is a much simpler solution than using an RACCommand.
ReactiveCocoa's delay: method makes this sort of ad-hoc scheduling very convenient -- no manual NSTimer wrangling here.