I'm writing an iOS app in Objective C. In one my classes (a View Controller), I have 2 different functions. Each of these functions, within it, has a call to an animation (UIView animateWithDuration). Let's call these functions Function A and Function B, and the animations they call within themselves Animation A and Animation B respectively. Animation A is sort of long and delayed, while B is pretty quick.
I absolutely need the animation in Function B to only start running once the animation in Function A completes. i.e. Animation B has to run after Animation A completes.
I CANNOT call Animation B from Animation A's completion block, because Animation B needs parameters available only to Function B in order to run:
FunctionA()
{
AnimationA()
}
Function B(x, y, z)
{
AnimationB(x, y, z)
}
How on earth do I solve this problem? I've tried creating a new separate queue and then stacking the Animation A and B calls on that, but it still doesn't work. What inevitably seems to happen is that, I'm guessing the actual UIView animateWithDuration call will invariably spawn its own thread, and so the block of code that runs it that I place on the queue will return as completed even while it's still going on, because it's the completion handler that is anyways going to run when it's done (which I can't use for the reason mentioned previously).
Any suggestions?
Thanks
Related
I am working in Swift. When a user presses a UIButton it calls a function ButtonPressed(). I would like ButtonPressed() to do two things:
Update the UIView by removing the current buttons and texts, then uploading some new text.
Call function TimeConsumingCalculation(). TimeConsumingCalculation is the complicated part of my app and does some calculations which take about 20 seconds or so to complete.
Right now, I have the code in the basic order:
ButtonPressed(){
self.Button.removeFromSuperview()
TimeConsumingCalculation()
}
However, it will not remove the button or do any other UI updates or additions until after the TimeConsumingCalculation is complete. I have read and attempted a few guides on closures and asynchronous functions, but have had no luck. Is there a special property with UIView that is causing it to be updated last?
As a side note - I have already attempted putting all UI actions in a separate function and calling it first. It doesn't work. The time consuming function does not take any variables from the buttons or UI or anything like that.
Thanks!
It seems like timeConsumingCalculation() is blocking the main queue, which is in charge of UI updates. Try calling it like this instead and use the isHidden property to hide the button instead of removing it from the view completely.
ButtonPressed(){
self.Button.isHidden = true
DispatchQueue.global(qos: DispatchQoS.QoSClass.userInitiated).async {
self.timeConsumingCalculation()
}
}
here you call timeConsumingCalculation() asynchronously on a background thread. The quality of service we give it is userInitiated, read more about quality of service classes here
when I call the runAction:completion:? function of a SKSpriteNode, and pass in a SKAction runBlock action the call back routine never gets called.
Well, this is possibly because SpriteKit has no way of knowing when your block actually stopped affecting the node in question. If the API was better designed maybe it'd give you a way of calling the completion from your block, but it doesn't. However, you can call whatever you'd call in the completion block yourself within your block.
Edit: Yes, the called (in this case SpriteKit) does know when your block ends executing, but your block may perform deferred calls that will further affect the node in question, so it can't be certain the action really ended. For example, think of a block that triggers a timer that varies a certain property over time.
I have a dataTask making a webservice API call, and in the completion block for that dataTask I use the returned info to build a UIImageView and add it as a subview of the parent UIViewController. I have tried it with two API calls and I would like to know why one causes the UIImageView to be displayed so much slower than the other. Inside of the completion block, the fast call, which takes less than 1 second, is:
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), {
(self.delegate as TBGQRCodeViewController).displayQRCode(receiveAddr, withAmountInBTC:amountBTC)
});
while the slower call, which takes roughly 13 seconds, is:
(self.delegate as TBGQRCodeViewController).displayQRCode(receiveAddr, withAmountInBTC:amountBTC)
The first clearly runs on the main queue, but the second one I'm not so sure, since it's running directly in the completion block of the dataTask.
Can someone explain in detail why these two calls of the same function have such markedly different run lengths?
As these calls update the UI ,your first call is on main thread which updates your imageView immediately.But your second call directly within dataTask completion handler which generally runs on secondary thread run loops so this call
(self.delegate as TBGQRCodeViewController).displayQRCode(receiveAddr, withAmountInBTC:amountBTC)
run on secondary thread runloop so it will not able to update UI. While some other call or some other event reloads the UIImageView which display the your computed image to display on UIImageView.
So as dataTask fetch data on secondary thread if your call is directly within completion handler than it is updating your imageView on secondary thread which should not be done as all UI must be update on main thread.Put your imageView updation on main thread.
I have a seemingly simple problem that I cannot for the life of me seem to figure out. In my iOS App, I have a UICollectionView that triggers network operation upon tapping it that can take a few seconds to complete. While the information is being downloaded, I want to display a UIView that fills the cell with a UIActivityIndicatorView that sits in the square until the loading is done, and the segue triggered. The problem is that it never appears. Right now my code looks like:
myLoadView.hidden = NO;
//Network Operation
myLoadView.hidden = YES;
The App simply stops for a couple seconds, and then moves on the the next view. I'd imagine Grand Central Dispatch has somthing to do with the solution, however please keep in mind that this code takes place in prepareForSegue, and the network info needs to be passed to the next View. For this reason not finishing the download before switching scenes has an obvious problem. Any help would be VASTLY appreciated. Thanks!
iOS commits changes in the interfaces after working out a routine. Hence you should perform your network operation in a background thread and then get back back on the main and perform the "show my view now thing". Have a look the below code for reference.
myLoadView.hidden = NO;
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue( DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_LOW, 0), ^{
//Network Operation
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
myLoadView.hidden = YES;
});
});
Your network operation seems to be carried out on the main thread, aka UI thread. This blocks all further UI calls, including the call to unhide a view, until completion.
To resolve this, make your call asynchronous.
You should read this in full, if you haven't already.
As mentioned by other answers, the problem is that the UIView change doesn't happen until the current method finishes running, which is where you are blocking. Before GCD was available I would split methods in two and use performSelector:withObject:afterDelay (to run the second part also on the UI loop) or performSelectorInBackground:withObject: at the end of the first method. This would commit all the waiting animaations first, then do the actual tasks in the second method.
Well the better option for this type of indication is by using the custom HUD libraries like SVProgressHUD or MBProgressHUD
Modern user interfaces, especially MacOS and iOS, have lots of “casual” animation -- views that appear through brief animated sequences largely orchestrated by the system.
[[myNewView animator] setFrame: rect]
Occasionally, we might have a slightly more elaborate animation, something with an animation group and a completion block.
Now, I can imagine bug reports like this:
Hey -- that nice animation when myNewView appears isn't happening in the new release!
So, we'd want unit tests to do some simple things:
confirm that the animation happens
check the duration of the animation
check the frame rate of the animation
But of course all these tests have to be simple to write and mustn't make the code worse; we don’t want to spoil the simplicity of the implicit animations with a ton of test-driven complexity!
So, what is a TDD-friendly approach to implementing tests for casual animations?
Justifications for unit testing
Let's take a concrete example to illustrate why we'd want a unit test. Let's say we have a view that contains a bunch of WidgetViews. When the user makes a new Widget by double-clicking, it’s supposed to initially appear tiny and transparent, expanding to full size during the animation.
Now, it's true that we don't want to need to unit test system behavior. But here are some things that might go wrong because we fouled things up:
The animation is called on the wrong thread, and doesn't get drawn. But in the course of the animation, we call setNeedsDisplay, so eventually the widget gets drawn.
We're recycling disused widgets from a pool of discarded WidgetControllers. NEW WidgetViews are initially transparent, but some views in the recycle pool are still opaque. So the fade doesn't happen.
Some additional animation starts on the new widget before the animation finishes. As a result, the widget begins to appear, and then starts jerking and flashing briefly before it settles down.
You made a change to the widget's drawRect: method, and the new drawRect is slow. The old animation was fine, but now it's a mess.
All of these are going to show up in your support log as, "The create-widget animation isn't working anymore." And my experience has been that, once you get used to an animation, it’s really hard for the developer to notice right away that an unrelated change has broken the animation. That's a recipe for unit testing, right?
The animation is called on the wrong thread, and doesn't get drawn.
But in the course of the animation, we call setNeedsDisplay, so
eventually the widget gets drawn.
Don't unit test for this directly. Instead use assertions and/or raise exceptions when animation is on the incorrect thread. Unit test that the assertion will raise an exception appropriately. Apple does this aggressively with their frameworks. It keeps you from shooting yourself in the foot. And you will know immediately when you are using an object outside of valid parameters.
We're recycling disused widgets from a pool of discarded
WidgetControllers. NEW WidgetViews are initially transparent, but some
views in the recycle pool are still opaque. So the fade doesn't
happen.
This is why you see methods like dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier in UITableView. You need a public method to get the reused WidgetView which is the perfectly opportunity to test properties like alpha are reset appropriately.
Some additional animation starts on the new widget before the
animation finishes. As a result, the widget begins to appear, and then
starts jerking and flashing briefly before it settles down.
Same as number 1. Use assertions to impose your rules on your code. Unit test that the assertions can be triggered.
You made a change to the widget's drawRect: method, and the new
drawRect is slow. The old animation was fine, but now it's a mess.
A unit test can be just timing a method. I often do this with calculations to ensure they stay within a reasonable time limit.
-(void)testAnimationTime
{
NSDate * start = [NSDate date];
NSView * view = [[NSView alloc]init];
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
[view display];
}
NSTimeInterval timeSpent = [start timeIntervalSinceNow] * -1.0;
if (timeSpent > 1.5)
{
STFail(#"View took %f seconds to calculate 10 times", timeSpent);
}
}
I can read your question two ways, so I want to separate those.
If you are asking, "How can I unit test that the system actually performs the animation that I request?", I would say it's not worth it. My experience tells me it is a lot of pain with not a lot of gain and in this kind of case, the test would be brittle. I've found that in most cases where we call operating system APIs, it provides the most value to assume that they work and will continue to work until proven otherwise.
If you are asking, "How can I unit test that my code requests the correct animation?", then that's more interesting. You'll want a framework for test doubles like OCMock. Or you can use Kiwi, which is my favorite testing framework and has stubbing and mocking built in.
With Kiwi, you can do something like the following, for example:
id fakeView = [NSView nullMock];
id fakeAnimator = [NSView nullMock];
[fakeView stub:#selector(animator) andReturn:fakeAnimator];
CGRect newFrame = {.origin = {2,2}, .size = {11,44}};
[[[fakeAnimator should] receive] setFrame:theValue(newFrame)];
[myController enterWasClicked:nil];
You don't want to actually wait for the animation; that would take the time the animation takes to run. If you have a few thousand tests, this can add up.
More effective is to mock out the UIView static method in a category so that it takes effect immediately. Then include that file in your test target (but not your app target) so that the category is compiled into your tests only. We use:
#import "UIView+SpecFlywheel.h"
#implementation UIView (SpecFlywheel)
#pragma mark - Animation
+ (void)animateWithDuration:(NSTimeInterval)duration animations:(void (^)(void))animations completion:(void (^)(BOOL finished))completion {
if (animations)
animations();
if (completion)
completion(YES);
}
#end
The above simply executes the animation block immediately, and the completion block immediately if it's provided as well.