I have an app implemented in native iOS (Swift). There is a web version of the app as well. A client wants to embed my app to its own app and suggested I use an iFrame and load the web version.
I understand this is a tricky solution as Apple might reject the app for not using native implementation.
What I want to ask is if there is a way to package my app entirely as a Framework and load it that way (app size is fairly big, with several viewControllers and functionality).
I understand that I won't have access to App-load functions like the AppDelegate.
Also what happens if my app has Library dependencies ? (such as Alamofire)
Any other things I should be concerned about ?
Thank you
There are obviously a lot of options around this as far as design/approach.
I've done this multiple times (with apps live on the app store) and really it's just like developing any Framework.
First: AppDelegate. The easy way around this is to have the app's AppDelegate subclass your Framework's AppDelegate:
#UIApplicationMain class ParentAppDelegate: FrameworkAppDelegate { }
Just make sure the App calls super on all the relevant methods.
Second: Dependencies. This is probably the most annoying part since Frameworks can't embed other frameworks. But you still have a few easy options:
Have the enclosing app embed the needed framework
Add the sources of the needed framework directly to your framework.
Use a dependency manager (e.g. cocoapods) that takes care of this for you.
Other Concerns: One trap you can easily run into is working with Bundles. Anytime you dynamically load images/strings/IB references/etc. you will need to specify you're using the Framework's bundle, as at times it can default to using the app's bundle. The easiest way to do this is with this init e.g. Bundle(for: self.self)
Also keep in mind that the settings in info.plist and entitlements your framework needs will need to be added by the parent app.
General Comments on Approach: My advice (take it or leave it ☺️) would be caution around simply adding your full application to a client's application. Aside from IP and App-Review concerns, it can result in adding a lot of complexity or a fork of your current application to support it, making future maintenance a hassle.
Instead I would recommend putting only the portions of the application your client requires into a separate framework that both you and your client use for your separate applications.
Related
I am working on a project with SwiftUI and it originally started with creating a new project as an "App" (Xcode, clicked on file, new, project, click on "App") but was then later asked to put it into a pod as a framework. I did it successfully (Xcode, clicked on file, new project, click on "Framework"), however I am unsure what the differences are and I'm unsure why I would want to do that. To me they look very similar, except that I'm unable to launch my project as a framework in the simulator. Luckily SwiftUI offers the canvas preview window however it is a bit finicky when it comes to certain button interactions, which is why I am wanting to use the simulator.
Two places of confusion:
What is the difference between an app and a framework project?
Why is it more advantageous to have my project as a framework?
An App is a standalone application that can be launched and run. For example, all of the apps that you have on your phone are just that -- apps. You tap on them and they launch and run, presenting a user interface, accepting input, etc.
A framework is something else entirely. It's a collection of code that is bundled together into a package that is used by another framework or by an app. Some frameworks are provided by the system -- for example, SwiftUI is a framework that it sounds like you're using in your app. Other frameworks are provided by 3rd parties. For example, you can find many frameworks via CocoaPods or the Swift Package Manager -- Alamofire is a common example. Also, you can make your own frameworks and use them in your own code as a form of organization and separation of responsibilities.
Why is it more advantageous to have my project as a framework?
It is not -- they are two almost completely different concepts (besides both ultimately being collections of code and resources). If you intend to build an app that is launch-able on someone's device, your only choice is to make an app. If you intend to make a collection of reusable code for use in your or someone else's app, than you would make a framework.
Excellent answer (and upvoted) by #jnpdx. Let me give you a physical example:
(1) Create a project in Xcode that is a framework. Call it "MyAppKit". Inside it create, well, basically anything - a View, UIView, or more likely a function that will be shared by several views. (Let's go with that.)
public func setLoginName(_ login:String) -> String {
return ""Hello, " + login + "!";
}
Pretty simple. Call it, pass in something, and it returns a string saying hello. Please note the public piece. It matters. (And there's much more there. This is a simple example.)
(2) Now we get to your app or apps. Let's say you have two apps that need to use this (again, very simple) code. One is SwiftUI, one is UIKit. (It doesn't matter except for syntax.) Sine my forte is UIKit I'll use that. (And it can be several dozen apps too.)
import MyAppKit
let myLoginMessage = setLoginName("World").
Pretty much, it's "Hello, World!'
Again, this is really a nonsensical example. But it should get you started on what the difference in Xcode is between a Framework project and an App project is.
I have an iOS app that add Sound FX to videos. Now I want to build app extension target to support stocked Photo App. However, I have to duplicate almost every codes from the iOS app. And my solution that I have so far is to put common functions in a shared files and use it for both targets, because some codes in the app linked to AppDelegate and I can't use it in App Extension. Is there any better way to avoid code duplication in this case?
One more question: most extensions that I saw on AppStore only have 1 screen, is there any rules for this?
In my app, I have to let users to choose sounds from folder & library, and it requires navigation controller. But Navigation Controller is not usable in App Extension, should I build my own Navigaion Controller or is there a better way?
As long as you don't need to target iOS 7 or earlier, you can put the common classes into a shared framework and load that framework from both targets. This avoids having two instances of the code on disk.
As an added bonus, because of the way the OS handles shared library loading, all of the actual code pages get shared between the app and the extension, so you aren't wasting RAM, either.
I support a suite of related iOS apps, some of which make use of extensions (WatchKit and Today Widget). All of these apps and extensions make use of a shared private framework I've built up over time for handling certain workflows around authentication and common business logic. This framework is maintained as a private pod.
Recently, I've run into a problem where I'd like to add a method to the framework that's only really useful for the iOS apps (extensions don't need it) that uses certain APIs that are unavailable to extensions (such as [UIApplication sharedApplicaion]). I'd like to get the usual benefit of shared code, where this is implemented in only one place (the shared framework) for all my various apps to leverage. However, I can't find a way to conditionally include that method for just the apps and not the extensions without getting a compile-time error.
Normal recommendations around this problem usually suggest the use of a preprocessor macro to opt-out around the problematic code if desired, but that doesn't really work for a shared framework situation. Macros are applied at compile-time, so the shared framework is either going to include that method, or not, and there doesn't seem to be a runtime solution to optionally exclude it. If it's included, the extensions can't compile. If it's not included, my apps can't make use of the feature.
I also started investigating if there was some way that Cocoapods could automatically make two versions of the framework, one to be used by the apps, and one by the extensions, but this would seem to introduce problems around duplicate symbols, and generally doesn't seem supported.
Are there any other suggestions for how to handle this, apart from just extracting out the problematic functionality into a different framework? (I really would prefer to just share one)
Building Modern Frameworks addresses versioning and the importance of getting the API right the first time. Then, it says every app has its own copy of the framework. So then, can't I change my framework carelessly, i.e., without worrying about breaking other apps that are using older versions of my framework?
If we're talking about your own app on iOS, you can do whatever you like. The "framework" is merely a module like any other module; it is included in the app and is simply part of the app's code, so if you revise it, the next update gets the revision and the new code that uses it and there's no problem.
On OS X, however, there's an ability to install a framework into the library where the app will see it. Clearly in that case the code that uses the framework must be careful about versioning. Similarly, even on iOS, if you are using your framework as a way to convey a module to other developers, you must try not to break heedlessly their existing code that uses your framework.
We have a problem in our company with an application and would like to advise us an optimal solution, the point is that we have an application for tablets made with Flex mobile, our application can open modules in execution time downloading it from a server, these modules are opened perfectly with AIR or Android but in IOS is not possible, that's not working. Some solutions for us to have the extra functionality that provide these modules have occurred, are as follows:
1. Create a library for each extra functionality of each client and import all of them in the main application project.
2. Create a unique library with the functionality of all clients and then, import it in the main application project.
3. Create as many native extensions (ANE) and functionalities as are required by our different customer and import them into our application.
I would like to know which solution is optimal because in the future we can get 100 customers and maybe too much functionality may slow down the application.
Thank you very much.
Apple does not allow dynamic linking at runtime. Modules are executable code and need to be bundled at build time, only then they can be loaded from the bundle.
Otherwise you could circumvent the AppStore and add any, potentially harmful code at execution time.