RxSwift Build an Observable based on a Variable - ios

I am trying to build an Observable which would output a value based on the value of a Variable.
Something like that:
let fullName = Variable<String>("")
let isFullNameOKObs: Observable<Bool>
isFullNameOKObs = fullName
.asObservable()
.map { (val) -> Bool in
// here business code to determine if the fullName is 'OK'
let ok = val.characters.count >= 3
return ok
}
Unfortunately the bloc in the map func is never called!
The reason behind this is that:
The fullName Variable is binded to a UITextField with the bidirectional operator <-> as defined in the RxSwift example.
The isFullNameOKObs Observable will be observed to hide or display the submit button of my ViewController.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
The model
class Model {
let fullName = Variable<String>("")
let isFullNameOKObs: Observable<Bool>
let disposeBag = DisposeBag()
init(){
isFullNameOKObs = fullName
.asObservable()
.debug("isFullNameOKObs")
.map { (val) -> Bool in
let ok = val.characters.count >= 3
return ok
}
.debug("isFullNameOKObs")
isRegFormOKObs = Observable.combineLatest(
isFullNameOKObs,
is...OK,
... ) { $0 && $1 && ... }
isRegFormOKObs
.debug("isRegFormOKObs")
.asObservable()
.subscribe { (event) in
// update the OK button
}
// removing this disposedBy resolved the problem
//.disposed(by: DisposeBag())
}
}
The ViewController:
func bindModel() -> Void {
_ = txFullName.rx.textInput <-> model!.fullName
......
}

Do you need the two-way binding between the UITextField and your Variable?
If not, I would suggest you try to just use bindTo() instead like this:
myTextField.rx.text.orEmpty.bindTo(fullName).disposed(by: disposeBag)

Related

Handling circular style events on observable sequence RxSwift

I would like to know the best possible way to handle the following situation, I have tried an approach as it will be described but I have encountered an issue of events calling each other repeatedly in a circular way hence it causes stackoverflow 😂
I have 4 observables as follows: -
let agreeToPrivacyPolicyObservable = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
let agreeToTermsObservable = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
let agreeToMarketingEmailObservable = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
let agreeToAllOptionsObservable = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
Goal:
Sync agree to all button with individual options. ie if agree to all is true/checked then force other options to be checked as well and vice-versa. Additionally if the previous state of all items were checked and either of them emit unchecked then remove a checkmark on Agree to all button.
The image below visualizes my goal above.
What I have tried:
Observable.combineLatest(
agreeToPrivacyPolicyObservable,
agreeToTermsObservable,
agreeToMarketingEmailObservable,
agreeToAllOptionsObservable
, resultSelector:{(termsChecked,privacyChecked,marketingChecked,agreeToAllChecked) in
switch (termsChecked,privacyChecked,marketingChecked,agreeToAllChecked) {
case (true, true, true,true):
//All boxes are checked nothing to change.
break
case (false,false,false,false):
//All boxes are unchecked nothing to change.
break
case (true,true,true,false):
// I omitted the `triggeredByAgreeToAll` flag implementation details for clarity
if triggeredByAgreeToAll {
updateIndividualObservables(checked: false)
}else {
agreeToAllOptionsObservable.accept(true)
}
case (false,false,false,true):
if triggeredByAgreeToAll {
updateIndividualObservables(checked: true)
}else {
agreeToAllOptionsObservable.accept(false)
}
default:
if triggeredByAgreeToAll && agreeToAllChecked {
updateIndividualObservables(checked: true)
}else if triggeredByAgreeToAll && agreeToAllChecked == false {
updateIndividualObservables(checked: false)
} else if (termsChecked == false || privacyChecked == false || marketingChecked == false ) {
agreeToAllOptionsObservable.accept(false)
}
}
}
})
.observeOn(MainScheduler.instance)
.subscribe()
.disposed(by: rx.disposeBag)
// Helper function
func updateIndividualObservables(checked: Bool) {
agreeToPrivacyPolicyObservable.accept(checked)
agreeToTermsObservable.accept(checked)
agreeToMarketingEmailObservable.accept(checked)
}
Explanation:
My attempt gives me Reentracy anomaly was detected error , which according to my observations is caused by events being triggered repeatedly. This seems to occurs in the default switch case (on my solution above). I think this solution is not good as I have to check which event triggered the function execution.
Is there any better approach or is it possible to refactor this solution into something easily manageable? Btw Feel free to ignore my implementation and suggest a different better approach if any. Thanks!
UPDATES (WORKING SOLUTION)
I successfully implemented a working solution by using #Rugmangathan idea (Found on the accepted answer). So I leave my solution here to help anyone in the future facing the same issue.
Here is the working solution: -
import Foundation
import RxSwift
import RxRelay
/// This does all the magic of selecting checkboxes.
/// It is shared across any view which uses the license Agreement component.
class LicenseAgreemmentState {
static let shared = LicenseAgreemmentState()
let terms = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
let privacy = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
let marketing = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
let acceptAll = BehaviorRelay<Bool>(value: false)
private let disposeBag = DisposeBag()
func update(termsChecked: Bool? = nil, privacyChecked: Bool? = nil, marketingChecked: Bool? = nil, acceptAllChecked: Bool? = nil) {
if let acceptAllChecked = acceptAllChecked {
// User toggled acceptAll button so change everything to it's value.
acceptAll.accept(acceptAllChecked)
updateIndividualObservables(termsChecked: acceptAllChecked, privacyChecked: acceptAllChecked, marketingChecked: acceptAllChecked)
} else {
// If either of the individual item is missing change acceptAll to false
if termsChecked == nil || privacyChecked == nil || marketingChecked == nil {
acceptAll.accept(false)
}
updateIndividualObservables(termsChecked: termsChecked, privacyChecked: privacyChecked, marketingChecked: marketingChecked)
}
// Deal with the case user triggered select All from individual items and vice-versa.
Observable.combineLatest(terms, privacy, marketing,resultSelector: {(termsChecked,privacyChecked, marketingChecked) in
switch (termsChecked,privacyChecked, marketingChecked) {
case (true, true, true):
self.acceptAll.accept(true)
case (false,false,false):
self.acceptAll.accept(false)
default:
break
}
})
.observeOn(MainScheduler.instance)
.subscribe()
.disposed(by: disposeBag)
}
// MARK: - Helpers
private func updateIndividualObservables(termsChecked: Bool?,privacyChecked: Bool?, marketingChecked:Bool?) {
if let termsChecked = termsChecked {
terms.accept(termsChecked)
}
if let privacyChecked = privacyChecked {
privacy.accept(privacyChecked)
}
if let marketingChecked = marketingChecked {
marketing.accept(marketingChecked)
}
}
}
Your helper function updateIndividualObservables(:) triggers an event every time you update which in turn triggers the combineLatest you implemented above.
I would suggest you to keep a State object instead
struct TermsAndConditionState {
var terms: Bool
var privacy: Bool
var marketing: Bool
var acceptAll: Bool
}
In updateIndividualObservables method change this state and implement this state change with your respective checkboxes
func render(state: TermsAndConditionState) {
if state.acceptAll {
// TODO: update all checkboxes
} else {
// TODO: update individual checkboxes
}
}
This is a simple state machine. State machines are implemented in Rx using the scan(_:accumulator:) or scan(into:accumulator:) operator like so:
struct Input {
let agreeToPrivacyPolicy: Observable<Void>
let agreeToTerms: Observable<Void>
let agreeToMarketingEmail: Observable<Void>
let agreeToAllOptions: Observable<Void>
}
struct Output {
let agreeToPrivacyPolicy: Observable<Bool>
let agreeToTerms: Observable<Bool>
let agreeToMarketingEmail: Observable<Bool>
let agreeToAllOptions: Observable<Bool>
}
func viewModel(input: Input) -> Output {
enum Action {
case togglePrivacyPolicy
case toggleTerms
case toggleMarketingEmail
case toggleAllOptions
}
let action = Observable.merge(
input.agreeToPrivacyPolicy.map { Action.togglePrivacyPolicy },
input.agreeToTerms.map { Action.toggleTerms },
input.agreeToMarketingEmail.map { Action.toggleMarketingEmail },
input.agreeToAllOptions.map { Action.toggleAllOptions }
)
let state = action.scan(into: State()) { (current, action) in
switch action {
case .togglePrivacyPolicy:
current.privacyPolicy = !current.privacyPolicy
case .toggleTerms:
current.terms = !current.terms
case .toggleMarketingEmail:
current.marketingEmail = !current.marketingEmail
case .toggleAllOptions:
if !current.allOptions {
current.privacyPolicy = true
current.terms = true
current.marketingEmail = true
}
}
current.allOptions = current.privacyPolicy && current.terms && current.marketingEmail
}
return Output(
agreeToPrivacyPolicy: state.map { $0.privacyPolicy },
agreeToTerms: state.map { $0.terms },
agreeToMarketingEmail: state.map { $0.marketingEmail },
agreeToAllOptions: state.map { $0.allOptions }
)
}
struct State {
var privacyPolicy: Bool = false
var terms: Bool = false
var marketingEmail: Bool = false
var allOptions: Bool = false
}

Swift Combine: `append` which does not require output to be equal?

Using Apple's Combine I would like to append a publisher bar after a first publisher foo has finished (ok to constrain Failure to Never). Basically I want RxJava's andThen.
I have something like this:
let foo: AnyPublisher<Fruit, Never> = /* actual publisher irrelevant */
let bar: AnyPublisher<Fruit, Never> = /* actual publisher irrelevant */
// A want to do concatenate `bar` to start producing elements
// only after `foo` has `finished`, and let's say I only care about the
// first element of `foo`.
let fooThenBar = foo.first()
.ignoreOutput()
.append(bar) // Compilation error: `Cannot convert value of type 'AnyPublisher<Fruit, Never>' to expected argument type 'Publishers.IgnoreOutput<Upstream>.Output' (aka 'Never')`
I've come up with a solution, I think it works, but it looks very ugly/overly complicated.
let fooThenBar = foo.first()
.ignoreOutput()
.flatMap { _ in Empty<Fruit, Never>() }
.append(bar)
I'm I missing something here?
Edit
Added a nicer version of my initial proposal as an answer below. Big thanks to #RobNapier!
I think instead of ignoreOutput, you just want to filter all the items, and then append:
let fooThenBar = foo.first()
.filter { _ in false }
.append(bar)
You may find this nicer to rename dropAll():
extension Publisher {
func dropAll() -> Publishers.Filter<Self> { filter { _ in false } }
}
let fooThenBar = foo.first()
.dropAll()
.append(bar)
The underlying issue is that ignoreAll() generates a Publisher with Output of Never, which usually makes sense. But in this case you want to just get ride of values without changing the type, and that's filtering.
Thanks to great discussions with #RobNapier we kind of concluded that a flatMap { Empty }.append(otherPublisher) solution is the best when the output of the two publishers differ. Since I wanted to use this after the first/base/'foo' publisher finishes, I've written an extension on Publishers.IgnoreOutput, the result is this:
Solution
protocol BaseForAndThen {}
extension Publishers.IgnoreOutput: BaseForAndThen {}
extension Combine.Future: BaseForAndThen {}
extension Publisher where Self: BaseForAndThen, Self.Failure == Never {
func andThen<Then>(_ thenPublisher: Then) -> AnyPublisher<Then.Output, Never> where Then: Publisher, Then.Failure == Failure {
return
flatMap { _ in Empty<Then.Output, Never>(completeImmediately: true) } // same as `init()`
.append(thenPublisher)
.eraseToAnyPublisher()
}
}
Usage
In my use case I wanted to control/have insight in when the base publisher finishes, therefore my solution is based on this.
Together with ignoreOutput
Since the second publisher, in case below appleSubject, won't start producing elements (outputting values) until the first publisher finishes, I use first() operator (there is also a last() operator) to make the bananaSubject finish after one output.
bananaSubject.first().ignoreOutput().andThen(appleSubject)
Together with Future
A Future already just produces one element and then finishes.
futureBanana.andThen(applePublisher)
Test
Here is the complete unit test (also on Github)
import XCTest
import Combine
protocol Fruit {
var price: Int { get }
}
typealias 🍌 = Banana
struct Banana: Fruit {
let price: Int
}
typealias 🍏 = Apple
struct Apple: Fruit {
let price: Int
}
final class CombineAppendDifferentOutputTests: XCTestCase {
override func setUp() {
super.setUp()
continueAfterFailure = false
}
func testFirst() throws {
try doTest { bananaPublisher, applePublisher in
bananaPublisher.first().ignoreOutput().andThen(applePublisher)
}
}
func testFuture() throws {
var cancellable: Cancellable?
try doTest { bananaPublisher, applePublisher in
let futureBanana = Future<🍌, Never> { promise in
cancellable = bananaPublisher.sink(
receiveCompletion: { _ in },
receiveValue: { value in promise(.success(value)) }
)
}
return futureBanana.andThen(applePublisher)
}
XCTAssertNotNil(cancellable)
}
static var allTests = [
("testFirst", testFirst),
("testFuture", testFuture),
]
}
private extension CombineAppendDifferentOutputTests {
func doTest(_ line: UInt = #line, _ fooThenBarMethod: (AnyPublisher<🍌, Never>, AnyPublisher<🍏, Never>) -> AnyPublisher<🍏, Never>) throws {
// GIVEN
// Two publishers `foo` (🍌) and `bar` (🍏)
let bananaSubject = PassthroughSubject<Banana, Never>()
let appleSubject = PassthroughSubject<Apple, Never>()
var outputtedFruits = [Fruit]()
let expectation = XCTestExpectation(description: self.debugDescription)
let cancellable = fooThenBarMethod(
bananaSubject.eraseToAnyPublisher(),
appleSubject.eraseToAnyPublisher()
)
.sink(
receiveCompletion: { _ in expectation.fulfill() },
receiveValue: { outputtedFruits.append($0 as Fruit) }
)
// WHEN
// a send apples and bananas to the respective subjects and a `finish` completion to `appleSubject` (`bar`)
appleSubject.send(🍏(price: 1))
bananaSubject.send(🍌(price: 2))
appleSubject.send(🍏(price: 3))
bananaSubject.send(🍌(price: 4))
appleSubject.send(🍏(price: 5))
appleSubject.send(completion: .finished)
wait(for: [expectation], timeout: 0.1)
// THEN
// A: I the output contains no banana (since the bananaSubject publisher's output is ignored)
// and
// B: Exactly two apples, more specifically the two last, since when the first Apple (with price 1) is sent, we have not yet received the first (needed and triggering) banana.
let expectedFruitCount = 2
XCTAssertEqual(outputtedFruits.count, expectedFruitCount, line: line)
XCTAssertTrue(outputtedFruits.allSatisfy({ $0 is 🍏 }), line: line)
let apples = outputtedFruits.compactMap { $0 as? 🍏 }
XCTAssertEqual(apples.count, expectedFruitCount, line: line)
let firstApple = try XCTUnwrap(apples.first)
let lastApple = try XCTUnwrap(apples.last)
XCTAssertEqual(firstApple.price, 3, line: line)
XCTAssertEqual(lastApple.price, 5, line: line)
XCTAssertNotNil(cancellable, line: line)
}
}
As long as you use .ignoreOutput(), it is safe to replace "ugly" .flatMap { _ in Empty<Fruit, Never>() } to simple .map { Fruit?.none! } which will never be called anyway and just changes the Output type.

do(onNext:) called twice when table view row is selected

I'm facing a problem when selecting the table view row on RxSwift. For details, the code on the do(onNext:) function is called twice, thus lead to the navigation pushed twice too. Here is my code in the viewModel, please help me resolve it. Thanks so much.
struct Input {
let loadTrigger: Driver<String>
let searchTrigger: Driver<String>
let selectMealTrigger: Driver<IndexPath>
}
struct Output {
let mealList: Driver<[Meal]>
let selectedMeal: Driver<Meal>
}
func transform(_ input: HomeViewModel.Input) -> HomeViewModel.Output {
let popularMeals = input.loadTrigger
.flatMap { _ in
return self.useCase.getMealList()
.asDriver(onErrorJustReturn: [])
}
let mealSearchList = input.searchTrigger
.flatMap { text in
return self.useCase.getMealSearchList(mealName: text)
.asDriver(onErrorJustReturn: [])
}
let mealList = Observable.of(mealSearchList.asObservable(), popularMeals.asObservable()).merge().asDriver(onErrorJustReturn: [])
let selectedMeal = input.selectMealTrigger
.withLatestFrom(mealList) { $1[$0.row] }
.do(onNext: { meal in
self.navigator.toMealDetail(meal: meal)
})
return Output(mealList: mealList, selectedMeal: selectedMeal)
}
Edit: Here's the implemetation on the ViewController:
func bindViewModel() {
self.tableView.delegate = nil
self.tableView.dataSource = nil
let emptyTrigger = searchBar
.rx.text.orEmpty
.filter { $0.isEmpty }
.throttle(0.1, scheduler: MainScheduler.instance)
.asDriver(onErrorJustReturn: "")
let loadMealTrigger = Observable
.of(emptyTrigger.asObservable(), Observable.just(("")))
.merge()
.asDriver(onErrorJustReturn: "")
let searchTrigger = searchBar.rx.text.orEmpty.asDriver()
.distinctUntilChanged()
.filter {!$0.isEmpty }
.throttle(0.1)
let selectMealTrigger = tableView.rx.itemSelected.asDriver()
let input = HomeViewModel.Input(
loadTrigger: loadMealTrigger,
searchTrigger: searchTrigger,
selectMealTrigger: selectMealTrigger
)
let output = viewModel.transform(input)
output.mealList
.drive(tableView.rx.items(cellIdentifier: MealCell.cellIdentifier)) { index, meal, cell in
let mealCell = cell as! MealCell
mealCell.meal = meal
}
.disposed(by: bag)
output.selectedMeal
.drive()
.disposed(by: bag)
}
Firstly, is this RxSwift?
If so, the .do(onNext:) operator provides side effects when you receive a new event via a subscription; Therefore, two "reactions" will happen when a table row is tapped: 1. subscription method and 2. .do(onNext:) event. Unfortunately, I do not have any further insight into your code, so there may be other stuff creating that error aswell.
Good luck!

RxSwift: How to create cache for last network response without creating class/struct property?

I'm working on iOS App that uses the IP Stack API for geolocation. I'd like to optimise the IP Stack Api usage by asking for external (public) IP address first and then re-use lat response for that IP if it hasn't changed.
So what I'm after is that I ask every time the https://www.ipify.org about external IP, then ask https://ipstack.com with given IP address. If I ask the second time but IP doesn't changed then re-use last response (or actually cached dictionary with IP's as keys and responses as values).
I have a solution but I'm not happy with this cache property in my code. It is some state and some other part of code can mutate this. I was thinking about using some scan() operator in RxSwfit but I just can't figure out any new ideas.
class ViewController: UIViewController {
#IBOutlet var geoButton: UIButton!
let disposeBag = DisposeBag()
let API_KEY = "my_private_API_KEY"
let provider = PublicIPProvider()
var cachedResponse: [String: Any] = [:] // <-- THIS
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
}
#IBAction func geoButtonTapped(_ sender: UIButton) {
// my IP provider for ipify.org
// .flatMap to ignore all nil values,
// $0 - my structure to contains IP address as string
let fetchedIP = provider.currentPublicIP()
.timeout(3.0, scheduler: MainScheduler.instance)
.flatMapLatest { Observable.from(optional: $0.ip) }
.distinctUntilChanged()
// excuse me my barbaric URL creation, it's just for demonstration
let geoLocalization = fetchedIP
.flatMapLatest { ip -> Observable<Any> in
// check if cache contains response for given IP address
guard let lastResponse = self.cachedResponse[ip] else {
return URLSession.shared.rx.json(request: URLRequest(url: URL(string: "http://api.ipstack.com/\(ip)?access_key=\(API_KEY)")! ))
.do(onNext: { result in
// store cache as a "side effect"
print("My result 1: \(result)")
self.cachedResponse[ip] = result
})
}
return Observable.just(lastResponse)
}
geoLocalization
.subscribe(onNext: { result in
print("My result 2: \(result)")
})
.disposed(by: disposeBag)
}
}
Is it possible to achieve the same functionality but without var cachedResponse: [String: Any] = [:] property in my class?
OMG! I spent a bunch of time with the answer for this question (see below) and then realized that there is a much simpler solution. Just pass the correct caching parameter in your URLRequest and you can do away with the internal cache completely! I left the original answer because I also do a general review of your code.
class ViewController: UIViewController {
let disposeBag = DisposeBag()
let API_KEY = "my_private_API_KEY"
let provider = PublicIPProvider()
#IBAction func geoButtonTapped(_ sender: UIButton) {
// my IP provider for ipify.org
let fetchedIP: Maybe<String> = provider.currentPublicIP() // `currentPublicIP()` returns a Single
.timeout(3.0, scheduler: MainScheduler.instance)
.map { $0.ip ?? "" }
.filter { !$0.isEmpty }
// excuse me my barbaric URL creation, it's just for demonstration
let geoLocalization = fetchedIP
.flatMap { (ip) -> Maybe<Any> in
let url = URL(string: "http://api.ipstack.com/\(ip)?access_key=cce3a2a23ce22922afc229b154d08393")!
return URLSession.shared.rx.json(request: URLRequest(url: url, cachePolicy: .returnCacheDataElseLoad))
.asMaybe()
}
geoLocalization
.observeOn(MainScheduler.instance)
.subscribe(onSuccess: { result in
print("My result 2: \(result)")
})
.disposed(by: disposeBag)
}
}
Original Answer
The short answer here is no. The best you can do is wrap the state in a class to limit its access. Something like this generic approach:
final class Cache<Key: Hashable, State> {
init(qos: DispatchQoS, source: #escaping (Key) -> Single<State>) {
scheduler = SerialDispatchQueueScheduler(qos: qos)
getState = source
}
func data(for key: Key) -> Single<State> {
lock.lock(); defer { lock.unlock() }
guard let state = cache[key] else {
let state = ReplaySubject<State>.create(bufferSize: 1)
getState(key)
.observeOn(scheduler)
.subscribe(onSuccess: { state.onNext($0) })
.disposed(by: bag)
cache[key] = state
return state.asSingle()
}
return state.asSingle()
}
private var cache: [Key: ReplaySubject<State>] = [:]
private let scheduler: SerialDispatchQueueScheduler
private let lock = NSRecursiveLock()
private let getState: (Key) -> Single<State>
private let bag = DisposeBag()
}
Using the above isolates your state and creates a nice reusable component for other situations where a cache is necessary.
I know it looks more complex than your current code, but gracefully handles the situation where there are multiple requests for the same key before any response is returned. It does this by pushing the same response object to all observers. (The scheduler and lock exist to protect data(for:) which could be called on any thread.)
I have some other suggested improvements for your code as well.
Instead of using flatMapLatest to unwrap an optional, just filter optionals out. But in this case, what's the difference between an empty String and a nil String? Better would be to use the nil coalescing operator and filter out empties.
Since you have the code in an IBAction, I assume that currentPublicIP() only emits one value and completes or errors. Make that clear by having it return a Single. If it does emit multiple values, then you are creating a new chain with every function call and all of them will be emitting values. It's unlikely that this is what you want.
URLSession's json(request:) function emits on a background thread. If you are going to be doing anything with UIKit, you will need to observe on the main thread.
Here is the resulting code with the adjustments mentioned above:
class ViewController: UIViewController {
private let disposeBag = DisposeBag()
private let provider = PublicIPProvider()
private let responses: Cache<String, Any> = Cache(qos: .userInitiated) { ip in
return URLSession.shared.rx.json(request: URLRequest(url: URL(string: "http://api.ipstack.com/\(ip)?access_key=cce3a2a23ce22922afc229b154d08393")!))
.asSingle()
}
#IBAction func geoButtonTapped(_ sender: UIButton) {
// my IP provider for ipify.org
let fetchedIP: Maybe<String> = provider.currentPublicIP() // `currentPublicIP()` returns a Single
.timeout(3.0, scheduler: MainScheduler.instance)
.map { $0.ip ?? "" }
.filter { !$0.isEmpty }
let geoLocalization: Maybe<Any> = fetchedIP
.flatMap { [weak responses] ip in
return responses?.data(for: ip).asMaybe() ?? Maybe.empty()
}
geoLocalization
.observeOn(MainScheduler.instance) // this is necessary if your subscribe messes with UIKit
.subscribe(onSuccess: { result in
print("My result 2: \(result)")
}, onError: { error in
// don't forget to handle errors.
})
.disposed(by: disposeBag)
}
}
I'm afraid that unless you have some way to cache your network responses (ideally with URLRequest's native caching mechanism), there will always be side-effects.
Here's a suggestion to try to keep them contained though:
Use Rx for your button tap as well, and get rid of the #IBAction. It's not great to have all that code in an #IBAction anyway (unless you did that for demonstration purposes).
That way, you can use a local-scope variable inside the setup function, which will only be captured by your flatMapLatest closure. It makes for some nice, clean code and helps you make sure that your cachedResponse dictionary is not tampered by other functions in your class.
class ViewController: UIViewController {
#IBOutlet var geoButton: UIButton!
let disposeBag = DisposeBag()
let API_KEY = "my_private_API_KEY"
let provider = PublicIPProvider()
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
prepareGeoButton()
}
func prepareGeoButton() {
// ----> Use RxCocoa UIButton.rx.tap instead of #IBAction
let fetchedIP = geoButton.rx.tap
.flatMap { _ in self.provider.currentPublicIP() }
.timeout(3.0, scheduler: MainScheduler.instance)
.flatMapLatest { Observable.from(optional: $0.ip) }
.distinctUntilChanged()
// ----> Use local variable.
// Still has side-effects, but is much cleaner and safer.
var cachedResponse: [String: Any] = [:]
let geoLocalization = fetchedIP
.flatMapLatest { ip -> Observable<Any> in
// check if cache contains response for given IP address
guard let lastResponse = cachedResponse[ip] else {
return URLSession.shared.rx.json(request: URLRequest(url: URL(string: "http://api.ipstack.com/\(ip)?access_key=cce3a2a23ce22922afc229b154d08393")! ))
.do(onNext: { result in
print("My result 1: \(result)")
cachedResponse[ip] = result
})
}
return Observable.just(lastResponse)
}
geoLocalization
.subscribe(onNext: { result in
print("My result 2: \(result)")
})
.disposed(by: disposeBag)
}
}
I did not want to change the code too much from what you had and add more implementation details into the mix, but if you choose to go this way, please:
a) Use a Driver instead of an observable for your button tap. More on Drivers here.
b) Use [weak self] inside your closures. Don't retain self as this might lead to your ViewController being retained in memory multiple times when you move away from the current screen in the middle of a network request, or some other long-running action.

How to observe the value in array with RxSwift

There is class have a Bool property
class Coupon: NSObject {
var invalid: Bool = false
}
I create a array [Coupon],I need to modify the coupon.invalid to true one by one.when all of these coupon.invalid == true ,then I can process next task,How can I implement this logic with RxSwift ?Please help me ~~
First you make your Coupon type a struct instead of a class.
struct Coupon {
var invalid = false
}
And embed your array into a Variable.
let coupons = Variable<[Coupon]>([])
coupons.value = getAllTheCoupons()
Now you can create an observable that emits a value whenever all the values are true.
let allTrue = coupons.asObservable()
.map { coupons in
coupons.contains(where: { $0.invalid == false }) == false
}
.filter { $0 }
allTrue.subscribe(onNext: { _ in
print("process next task.")
}).disposed(by: bag)

Resources