First I make a SDK about Bluetooth
ImyBluetoothManager.swift
public protocol ImyBluetoothManager: NSObjectProtocol {
var delegate: myBluetoothDelegate?{get set}
}
public class myBluetooth {
public static func getManager() -> ImyBluetoothManager? {
return myBluetoothManager.sharedInstance()
}
}
myBluetoothManager.swift
class myBluetoothManager: NSObject, CBCentralManagerDelegate, CBPeripheralDelegate, myBluetoothManager {
static var instance: myBluetoothManager!
var delegate: myBluetoothDelegate? {
get {
return delegate
}
set {
delegate = newValue
}
}
private override init() {}
static func sharedInstance() ->myBluetoothManager {
if self.instance == nil {
self.instance = myBluetoothManager()
self.instance.setup()
self.instance.scanBLE()
}
return self.instance
}
Then I run it and get myBluetooth.framework,and I new a project 'ExampleApp'
ExampleApp
ViewController.swift
import myBluetooth
class ViewController: UIViewController,myBluetoothDelegate {
override func viewDidLoad() {
let test = SiltaBluetooth.getManager()
test?.delegate = self
super.viewDidLoad()
}
}
Then I run ExampleApp,and warning me.
warning: could not load any Objective-C class information. This will
significantly reduce the quality of type information available.
Related
Ideally, I want to create a BaseViewController class that takes in a protocol type (of a delegate) and have a weak variable as the delegate. Something like this:
class BaseViewController<Delegate: AnyObject> {
weak var delegate: Delegate?
init(delegate: Delegate) {
self.delegate = delegate
super.init(...)
}
}
And then inherit from a view controller like so:
protocol MyDelegate: AnyObject {
func funcA()
func funcB()
}
class SomeViewController: BaseViewController<MyDelegate> {
func doSomething() {
delegate?.funcA()
}
}
This doesn't work as the compiler complains:
'BaseViewController' requires that 'MyDelegate' be a class type
How can I work this around to achieve what I need?
Thanks in advance :)
Thats because in swift protocols doesn't confirm to them selves, you can't use "MyProtocol" as concrete type confirming to protocol "MyDelegate"
What you can rather do is
protocol MyDelegate: AnyObject {
func funcA()
func funcB()
}
class BaseViewController<Delegate: MyDelegate> {
weak var delegate: Delegate?
init(delegate: Delegate) {
self.delegate = delegate
super.init(...)
//keeping OPs code as is
}
}
class SomeOtherDelegateClass: MyDelegate {
func funcA() {
//some code here
}
func funcB() {
//some code here
}
}
class SomeViewController: BaseViewController<SomeOtherDelegateClass> {
func doSomething() {
self.delegate?.funcA()
}
}
EDIT 1:
As OP mentioned in comment, he is trying to introduce a generic property in BaseViewController that will simply hold a weak reference to any instance whose class is decided/declared by Child classes of BaseViewController using generics, I am simplifying the above answer a bit
Try this
protocol MyDelegate {
func funcA()
func funcB()
}
class BaseViewController<Delegate> where Delegate: AnyObject {
weak var delegate: Delegate?
init(delegate: Delegate) {
self.delegate = delegate
super.init(...)
//keeping OPs code as is
}
}
class SomeOtherDelegateClass: MyDelegate {
func funcA() {
//some code here
}
func funcB() {
//some code here
}
}
class SomeViewController: BaseViewController<SomeOtherDelegateClass> {
func doSomething() {
self.delegate?.funcA()
}
}
protocol MyDelegate2 {
func funcABCD()
}
class SomeOtherDelegateClass2: MyDelegate2 {
func funcABCD() {
//some code here
}
}
class SomeViewController2: BaseViewController<SomeOtherDelegateClass2> {
func doSomething() {
self.delegate?.funcABCD()
}
}
TBH, I really dont see much of benefit of this design! Probably you need to revisit the code structure and see if you can come up with better code structure :)
You should set your delegate as a constraint for the generic type T in BaseViewController:
protocol MyDelegate: AnyObject {
func funcA()
func funcB()
}
class Delegated1: MyDelegate {
func funcA() { print("A1") }
func funcB() {}
}
class Delegated2: MyDelegate {
func funcA() { print("A2") }
func funcB() {}
}
class BaseViewController<T: MyDelegate>: UIViewController {
var delegate: T?
func doSomething() {
delegate?.funcA()
}
}
class SomeViewController1: BaseViewController<Delegated1> {}
class SomeViewController2: BaseViewController<Delegated2> {}
class TestClass {
let viewController1: SomeViewController1 = {
let viewController = SomeViewController1(nibName: nil, bundle: nil)
viewController.delegate = .init()
return viewController
}()
let viewController2: SomeViewController2 = {
let viewController = SomeViewController2(nibName: nil, bundle: nil)
viewController.delegate = .init()
return viewController
}()
// prints:
// A1
// A2
func myFunc() {
viewController1.doSomething()
viewController2.doSomething()
}
}
I have a situation where I declare two functions in a protocol, one of them takes an optional generically constrained parameter, the other function takes no parameters, but needs to be implemented in an extension as a default function where it calls the one with a parameter and passes nil. However I get this error:
Argument passed to call that takes no arguments
My code:
public protocol MenuAccessible {
var menuEntryViewController: UIViewController { get }
}
public protocol MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadTabs<T>(from uiProvider: T?) where T: MenuAccessible
func reloadTabs()
}
public extension MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadTabs() {
reloadTabs(from: nil) // error here, can't infer type
}
}
Obviously the compiler is not able to infer the type. If I for example pass a nil (Optional) of the required type, then the compiler is happy. For example:
struct MenuAccessibleObject: MenuAccessible {
var menuEntryViewController: UIViewController { return UIViewController() }
}
public extension MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadTabs() {
let menuAccessible: MenuAccessibleObject? = nil
reloadTabs(from: menuAccessible) // passes nil, but compiler is happpy
}
}
Is there a way to pass nil in my default function implementation and not have to create that dummy object?
I don't understand why you are Using Generic T there if you are defining type is MenuAccessible
Following is simply compiler without any issue
public protocol MenuAccessible {
var menuEntryViewController: UIViewController { get }
}
public protocol MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadTabs(from uiProvider: MenuAccessible?)
func reloadTabs()
}
public extension MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadTabs() {
reloadTabs(from: nil)
}
}
public extension MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadTabs(from uiProvider: MenuAccessible?) {
fatalError() // implement me
}
}
EDIT
I don't know this will work for you or not but try this
public protocol MenuAccessible {
var menuEntryViewController: UIViewController { get }
}
public class UIProvider:NSObject {
}
public protocol MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadAllTheItems<T>(from uiProvider: T?) where T: UIProvider, T: MenuAccessible
func reloadTabs()
}
public extension MenuTabBarControllerProtocol {
func reloadTabs() {
self.reloadAllTheItems(from: Temp())
}
func reloadAllTheItems (provider:(UIProvider & MenuAccessible)) {
}
}
class Temp: (UIProvider & MenuAccessible) {
var menuEntryViewController: UIViewController {
return UIViewController()
}
}
I created class and I write singleton function called " example "
import UIKit
class example: NSObject {
class example {
static let sharedInstance = example()
var userInfo = (ID: "bobthedev", Password: 01036343984)
// Networking: communicating server
func network() {
// get everything
}
private init() { }
}
}
import UIKit
class ViewController: UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
example.sharedInstance.userInfo
// (ID "bobthedev", Password 01036343984)
// ViewController One
example.sharedInstance.userInfo.ID // "bobthedev"
}
But I'm getting error * Type 'example' has no member 'sharedInstance' *
https://learnswiftwithbob.com/course/object-oriented-swift/singleton-pattern.html
You created a nested class.
Just skip the inner declaration:
import UIKit
class Example: NSObject {
static let sharedInstance = Example()
var userInfo = (ID: "bobthedev", Password: 01036343984)
// Networking: communicating server
func network() {
// get everything
}
private override init() { }
}
class ViewController: UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
Example.sharedInstance.userInfo
// (ID "bobthedev", Password 01036343984)
// ViewController One
Example.sharedInstance.userInfo.ID // "bobthedev"
}
}
You have embedded example class inside example so when you are doing example.sharedInstance it is the outer one, so just delete the outer example class.
Class name should start with capital letter.
No need to declare class inside class you need to declare variable for singleton, please check following code.
class Example {
class var sharedInstance: Example {
struct Singleton {
static let instance = Example()
}
return Singleton.instance
}
var userInfo = (ID: "bobthedev", Password: 01036343984)
// Networking: communicating server
func network() {
// get everything
}
private init() { }
}
class ViewController: UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
Example.sharedInstance.userInfo
// (ID "bobthedev", Password 01036343984)
// ViewController One
example.sharedInstance.userInfo.ID // "bobthedev"
}
I want to Decorate UIViewController with the ability to adjust it's interface when setInteractionEnabled method is called from another class (ex. Network State Manager). All changes (if any) should be provided in the concrete controller by overriding onInteractionChanged. Here is my code:
import Foundation
typealias InteractionClosure = ((enabled: Bool) -> Void)
protocol Interaction: class {
var onInteractionChanged: InteractionClosure? { get set }
func setInteractionEnabled(enabled: Bool)
}
extension Interaction where Self: UIViewController {
// Default: Do nothing
// Throws: - Extensions may not contain stored properties
var onInteractionChanged: InteractionClosure? = nil
func setInteractionEnabled(enabled: Bool) {
onInteractionChanged?(enabled: enabled)
}
}
extension UIViewController : Interaction {}
How to add default implementation for onInteractionChanged?
Answering my own question is something usually I don't do, but here is my solution:
typealias InteractionClosure = (enabled: Bool) -> Void
protocol Interaction: class {
func addOnInteractionChanged(closure: InteractionClosure)
func setInteractionEnabled(enabled: Bool)
}
extension Interaction where Self: UIViewController {
func addOnInteractionChanged(closure: InteractionClosure) {
onInteractionChanged = closure
}
func setInteractionEnabled(enabled: Bool) {
onInteractionChanged?(enabled: enabled)
}
// MARK: - Private
private var onInteractionChanged: InteractionClosure? {
get {
let wrapper =
objc_getAssociatedObject(self, &icAssociationKey) as? ClosureWrapper
return wrapper?.closure
}
set(newValue) {
objc_setAssociatedObject(self,
&icAssociationKey,
ClosureWrapper(newValue),
.OBJC_ASSOCIATION_RETAIN)
}
}
}
extension UIViewController : Interaction {}
// Helpers
private var icAssociationKey: UInt8 = 0
private class ClosureWrapper {
var closure: InteractionClosure?
init(_ closure: InteractionClosure?) {
self.closure = closure
}
}
Client class:
class LoginViewController: UIViewController {
// MARK: - Lifecycle
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
self.setup()
}
// MARK: - Private
private func setup() {
// ...
addOnInteractionChanged { [unowned self] (enabled) in
self.signInButton.enabled = enabled
self.activityIndicatorView.hidden = !enabled
}
}
}
In manager class:
visibleViewController?.setInteractionEnabled(true)
If you would like property to have only { get } ability, you can use:
protocol TestProtocol {
var testClosure: ((_ parameter: Bool) -> Void)? { get }
}
extension TestProtocol {
var testClosure: ((_ parameter: Bool) -> Void)? {
return { parameter in
print(parameter)
}
}
}
I have a class with a delegate. I create a subclass, which also has a delegate. I wanted to let the protocol used for the second delegate extend the protocol used for first delegate:
protocol MySuperClassProtocol {
func foo()
}
class MySuperClass {
var delegate:MySuperClassProtocol?
}
protocol MySubClassProtocol:MySuperClassProtocol {
func bar()
}
class MySubClass: MySuperClass {
override var delegate:MySubClassProtocol? // compiler error - "cannot override..."
func test() {
delegate?.foo()
delegate?.bar()
}
}
class UserClass:MySubClassProtocol {
func foo() {
println("foo!")
}
func bar() {
println("bar")
}
}
Is there a way to solve this? The only possible solution I see is to make the 2 protocols independent of each other, and use different names. Like this:
protocol MySuperClassProtocol {
func foo()
}
class MySuperClass {
var mySuperClassDelegate:MySuperClassProtocol?
}
protocol MySubClassProtocol {
func bar()
}
class MySubClass: MySuperClass {
var mySubClassDelegate:MySubClassProtocol?
func test() {
mySuperClassDelegate?.foo()
mySubClassDelegate?.bar()
}
}
class UserClass:MySuperClassProtocol, MySubClassProtocol {
func foo() {
println("foo!")
}
func bar() {
println("bar")
}
}
But this looks a bit weird + will not let me use naming convention for delegate- "delegate".
Sorry for necroposting, the only one solution i found is:
protocol SuperClassDelegate {
func first_method()
}
class SuperClass {
var delegate: SuperClassDelegate?
func do_something() {
delegate?.first_method()
}
}
protocol SubClassDelegate: SuperClassDelegate {
func second_method()
}
class SubClass: SuperClass {
private var subDelegate: SubClassDelegate?
override var delegate: SuperClassDelegate? {
get { return self.subDelegate }
set { self.subDelegate = newValue as! SubClassDelegate? }
}
//override func do_something() {
// super.do_something()
// subDelegate?.second_method()
//}
func do_something_other() {
//subDelegate?.first_method()
self.do_something()
subDelegate?.second_method()
}
}
class InheritanceAndDelegation: SubClassDelegate {
let obj = SubClass()
init() {
obj.delegate = self
}
internal func first_method() {
print("Hello from SuperClass")
}
internal func second_method() {
print("Hello from SubClass")
}
func check() {
obj.do_something_other()
}
}
let inheritanceAndDelegation = InheritanceAndDelegation()
inheritanceAndDelegation.check()
//prints:
//Hello from SuperClass
//Hello from SubClass
Commented code works too. Hope it will be useful for someone.
I was trying to find an ideal solution to this for some time, but could not come up with anything better that this:
protocol BaseDelegateProtocol: class { }
class BaseDelegate: BaseDelegateProtocol { }
class BaseActor {
weak var delegate: BaseDelegate? = nil
}
// MARK: -
protocol ConcreteDelegateProtocol: class {
func doSomething()
}
class ConcreteDelegate: BaseDelegate, ConcreteDelegateProtocol {
func doSomething() {
// Do something
}
}
class ConcreteActor: BaseActor {
private weak var concreteDelegate: ConcreteDelegateProtocol? = nil
override var delegate: BaseDelegate? {
didSet {
concreteDelegate = delegate as? ConcreteDelegateProtocol
}
}
}
Above works in XCode 7 / Swift 2.
This pattern allows adopting more and more protocols on the way down inheriting from BaseDelegate.
There is no need to inherit protocols one from the other, which helps keeping things isolated.
didSet observer on delegate property is automatically called for superclasses, therefore no need to call super.<blah> explicitly, and no risk to 'forget' doing so
Concrete delegate properties can be kept private on each level of inheritance, thereby reducing the clutter.
You can do it in another way, you can add the delegate variable in Subclass and use it to access the SuperClassProtocol also using delegate?.foo().
protocol MySuperClassProtocol {
func foo()
}
class MySuperClass {
//var delegate:MySuperClassProtocol?
}
protocol MySubClassProtocol:MySuperClassProtocol {
func bar()
}
class MySubClass: MySuperClass {
var delegate:MySubClassProtocol?
func test() {
delegate?.foo()
delegate?.bar()
}
}
class UserClass:MySubClassProtocol {
func foo() {
println("foo!")
}
func bar() {
println("bar")
}
}
But the issue with this approach is you can never use MySuperClassProtocol independently unless you create a new SubClass of MySuperClass only for declaring delegate variable.