Observe Collection Results in Realm with Combine and SwiftUI - swiftui

I am trying out this quick start for SwiftUI and Combine in order to try and understand how to connect my Realm database to Combine.
The example observes a RealmSwift.List and keeps a table populated with its data. This is is a linked list to a child class. I'm wondering how to observe a Results collection so I can keep track of any changes to an entire Realm class.
For example, let's say I have a Workspace class:
class Workspace: Object, ObjectKeyIdentifiable{
#objc dynamic var id = UUID().uuidString
#objc dynamic var name = ""
#objc dynamic var archived = false
}
In the state object, I can set up a Results<Workspace> variable like this:
class AppState: ObservableObject {
#Published var workspaces: Results<Workspace>?
var cancellables = Set<AnyCancellable>()
init(){
let realmPublisher = PassthroughSubject<Realm, Error>()
realmPublisher
.sink(receiveCompletion: { _ in }, receiveValue: { realm in
//Get the Results
self.workspaces = realm.objects(Workspace.self)
})
.store(in: &cancellables)
realmPublisher.send(try! Realm())
return
}
}
But when it comes time to observe the object, I can't because Results isn't an object (I assume).
struct ContentView: App {
#ObservedObject var state = AppState()
var view: some View {
ItemsView(workspaces: state.workspaces!)
}
var body: some Scene {
WindowGroup {
view.environmentObject(state)
}
}
}
struct ItemsView: View {
#ObservedObject var workspaces: Results<Workspace> //<!-- Error
var body: some View {
//...
}
}
Xcode gives a syntax error on the workspaces property:
Property type 'Results' does not match that of the 'wrappedValue' property of its wrapper type 'ObservedObject'
Is it possible to observe a set of Results just like we can have a notification listener on a collection of Results?

Technically, you could hook up a sink to state.workspaces (state.$workspaces.sink()), but in this case, I think you're overcomplicating the problem.
You already have an #ObservableObject in your ContentView (AppState) that is managing the results for you. So, change ItemsView to just take this as a parameter:
var workspaces: Results<Workspace>?
It doesn't need to be an #ObservedObject -- either way, whether it's getting observed in that view or it's parent view, it's going to get re-rendered. It does have to be optional here, since it's an optional value on your AppState, unless you want to keep passing it with the force unwrap (!), but that's generally a bad idea, since it'll crash if it ever is in fact nil.
Also, above, in your Realm code, make sure it's matching the tutorial that you were following. For example, you have Publisher.sink which should really be realmPublisher.sink

You are correct, Results is a struct, and therefore cannot be covered by #StateObject or #ObservedObject. Your workaround is suitable for now.
Once https://github.com/realm/realm-cocoa/pull/7045 is released, you will be able to use one of the new Realm property wrappers to embed your Results into the view directly. At the time of this posting, that would be #FetchRealmResults, but that is subject to change.

Related

Can you change the realm configuration of #ObservedResults to get new results on the fly?

Context
I have two different realms that a user can switch between at any point they decide; in-memory or on-disk.
I store this Realm configuration on an observable object which publishes the change when required:
class RealmServiceConfig: ObservableObject {
static var config = CurrentValueSubject<Realm.Configuration?, Never>(nil)
}
I have a class that stores realm filters/sorts as #Published variables that a user can change at any point.
class Store: ObservableObject
{
static var shared = Store()
#Published var realmFilter: NSPredicate? = nil
#Published var realmSortKeyPath: String = "fieldOnMyRealmModel"
#Published var realmSortKeyPathAscending: Bool = false
}
I have two views:
ListView - This shows the live results of Objects in the current Realm.
As the filter/sort changes, the filteredObjects is recalculated thanks to the #Published values, but, it still points to the same config.
//import SwiftUI
//import Combine
//import RealmSwift
struct ListView: View
{
#ObservedObject var store = Store.shared
#ObservedResults(MyRealmModel.self, configuration: RealmServiceConfig.config.value) var unfilteredObjects
var body: some View {
let filteredObjects = unfilteredObjects
.filter(store.realmFilter ?? NSPredicate(value: true))
.sorted(by: [SortDescriptor(keyPath: "\(store.realmSortKeyPath)", ascending: store.realmSortKeyPathAscending)])
return VStack(spacing: 0) {
ScrollView {
VStack {
ForEach(filteredObjects) { object in
Text(object.name)
}
}
}
}
}
}
SettingsView - The user can change their Realm configuration between in-memory and on-disk here which updates the aforementioned RealmServiceConfig.config value
When navigating to SettingsView, the ListView is moved to the background, it is not removed from the view hierarchy.
Question
When a user changes the realm and therefore updates the RealmServiceConfig.config value, is it possible to force reload #ObservedResults with the latest configuration?
Based on the current setup, even though my configuration parameter points to the published value, this is never applied.
Workaround
I have implemented this on a model class that stores the Results<Object> in a #Published variable which allows me to react and update the query based on the config changes and pass the results through to the views.
It would just be cleaner to have this all contained in the SwiftUI view where it's needed.
Maybe this is not available yet/works against how #ObservedResults is meant to be used?

Binding<String> action tried to update multiple times per frame in SwiftUI

I have a VM that is implemented as follows:
LoginViewModel
class LoginViewModel: ObservableObject {
var username: String = ""
var password: String = ""
}
In my ContentView, I use the VM as shown below:
#StateObject private var loginVM = LoginViewModel()
var body: some View {
NavigationView {
Form {
TextField("User name", text: $loginVM.username)
TextField("Password", text: $loginVM.password)
Every time I type something in the TextField it shows the following message in the output window:
Binding<String> action tried to update multiple times per frame.
Binding<String> action tried to update multiple times per frame.
Binding<String> action tried to update multiple times per frame.
It is a message and not an error.
If I decorate my username and password properties with #Published then the message goes away but the body is rendered each time I type in the TextField.
Any ideas what is going on and whether I should use #Published or not. I don't think I will gain anything from putting the #Published attribute since this is a one-way binding and I don't want to display anything on the view once the username changes.
If I decorate my username and password properties with #Published then the message goes away
This is the correct solution. You need to use #Published on those properties because that is how SwiftUI gets notified when the properties change.
the body is rendered each time I type in the TextField
That is fine. Your body method is not expensive to compute.
I don't think I will gain anything from putting the #Published attribute since this is a one-way binding
You cannot be sure SwiftUI will work correctly (now or in future releases) if you don't use #Published. SwiftUI expects to be notified when the value of a Binding changes, even when a built-in SwiftUI component like TextField causes the change.
For the simple case - the state is kept in the same view or in a ModelSupport class, consists of strings or other primitive types, and there's only one of each, #Published will work fine.
I got this error with a model class containing an array of structs and using a List, and every time you type inside a TextField inside a list (or every time you select an item in a list), the view gets refreshed, and the error gets triggered.
I am thus using a DelayedTextField:
struct DelayedTextField: View {
var title: String = ""
#Binding var text: String
#State private var tempText: String = ""
var body: some View {
TextField(title, text: $tempText, onEditingChanged: { editing in
if !editing {
$text.wrappedValue = tempText
}
})
.onAppear {
tempText = text
}
}
}
and the binding update error is no more.

SwiftUI View not updating on async change to published properties of Observed Object

I have the following SwiftUI View:
struct ProductView: View {
#ObservedObject var productViewModel: ProductViewModel
var body: some View {
VStack {
ZStack(alignment: .top) {
if(self.productViewModel.product != nil) {
URLImage(url: self.productViewModel.product!.imageurl, itemColor: self.productViewModel.selectedColor)
}
else {
Image("loading")
}
}
}
}
that observes a ProductViewModel
class ProductViewModel: ObservableObject {
#Published var selectedColor: UIColor = .white
#Published var product: Product?
private var cancellable: AnyCancellable!
init(productFuture: Future<Product, Never>) {
self.cancellable = productFuture.sink(receiveCompletion: { comp in
print(comp)
}, receiveValue: { product in
self.product = product
print(self.product) // this prints the expected product. The network call works just fine
})
}
The Product is a Swift struct that contains several string properties:
struct Product {
let id: String
let imageurl: String
let price: String
}
It is fetched from a remote API. The service that does the fetching returns a Combine future and passes it to the view model like so:
let productFuture = retrieveProduct(productID: "1")
let productVM = ProductViewModel(productFuture: productFuture)
let productView = ProductView(productViewModel: productViewModel)
func retrieveProduct(productID: String) -> Future<Product, Never>{
let future = Future<Product, Never> { promise in
// networking logic that fetches the remote product, once it finishes the success callback is invoked
promise(.success(product))
}
return future
}
For the sake of brevity, I've excluded the networking and error handling logic since it is irrelevant for the case at hand. To reproduce this as quickly as possible, just initialize a mock product with some dummy values and pass it to the success callback with a delay like this:
let mockproduct = Product(id: "1", imageurl: "https://exampleurl.com", price: "$10")
DispatchQueue.main.asyncAfter(deadline: .now() + 2.0, execute: {
promise(.success(mockproduct))
})
Once the product arrives over the network, it is assigned to the published product property.
The fetching works and the correct value is assigned to the published property. Obviously this happens after the view has been created since the network call takes some time. However, the View never updates even though the published object is changed.
When I pass the product directly through the View Model initializer rather than the future, it works as expected and the view displays the correct product.
Any suggestions on why the view does not react to changes in the state of the view model when it is updated asynchronously through the combine future?
EDIT: When I asked this question I had the ProductViewModel + ProductView nested inside another view. So basically the productview was only a part of a larger CategoryView. The CategoryViewmodel initialized both the ProductViewModel and the ProductView in a dedicated method:
func createProductView() -> AnyView {
let productVM = productViewModels[productIndex]
return AnyView(ProductView(productViewModel: productVM))
}
which was then called by the CategoryView on every update. I guess this got the Published variables in the nested ProductViewModel to not update correctly because the view hierarchy from CategoryView downwards got rebuilt on every update. Accordingly, the method createProductView got invoked on every new update, resulting in a completely new initialization of the ProductView + ProductViewModel.
Maybe someone with more experience with SwiftUI can comment on this.
Is it generally a bad idea to have nested observable objects in nested views or is there a way to make this work that is not an antipattern?
If not, how do you usually solve this problem when you have nested views that each have their own states?
I have been iterating on patterns like this to find what I think works best. Not sure what the problem is exactly. My intuition suggests that SwiftUI is having trouble making updates on the != nil part.
Here is the pattern that I have been using which has been working.
Define an enum for states in your networking logic
public enum NetworkingModelViewState {
case loading
case hasData
case noResults
case error
}
Add the enumeration as a variable on your "View Model"
class ProductViewModel: ObservableObject {
#Published public var state: NetworkingModelViewState = .loading
}
Update the state as you progress through your networking
self.cancellable = productFuture.sink(receiveCompletion: { comp in
print(comp)
}, receiveValue: { product in
self.product = product
self.state = NetworkingModelViewState.hasData
print(self.product) // this prints the expected product. The network call works just fine
})
Now make a decision in your SwiftUI based on the Enum value
if(self.productViewModel.state == NetworkingModelViewState.hasData) {
URLImage(url: self.productViewModel.product!.imageurl, itemColor: self.productViewModel.selectedColor)
}
else {
Image("loading")
}
Musings ~ It's hard to debug declarative frameworks. They are powerful and we should keep learning them but be aware of getting stuck. Moving too SwiftUI has forced me to really think about MVVM. My takeaway is that you really need to separate out every possible variable that controls your UI. You should not rely on checks outside of reading a variable. The Combine future pattern has a memory leak that Apple will fix next release. Also, you will be able to switch inside SwiftUI next release.

onReceive in SwiftUI view causes infinite loop

In a SwiftUI app, I have an ObservableObject that keeps track of user settings:
class UserSettings: ObservableObject {
#Published var setting: String?
}
I have a view model to control the state for my view:
class TestViewModel: ObservableObject {
#Published var state: String = ""
}
And I have my view. When the user setting changes, I want to get the view model to update the state of the view:
struct HomeView: View {
#EnvironmentObject var userSettings: UserSettings
#ObservedObject var viewModel = TestViewModel()
var body: some View {
Text(viewModel.state)
.onReceive(userSettings.$setting) { setting in
self.viewModel.state = setting
}
}
}
When the UserSettings.setting is changed in another view it causes onReceive on my view to get called in an infinite loop, and I don't understand why. I saw this question, and that loop makes sense to me because the state of the ObservableObject being observed is being changed on observation.
However, in my case I'm not changing the observed object (environment object) state. I'm observing the environment object and changing the view model state which redraws the view.
Is the view redrawing what's causing the issue here? Does onReceive get called everytime the view is redrawn?
Is there a better way of accomplishing what I'm trying to do?
EDIT: this is a greatly simplified version of my problem. In my app, the view model takes care of executing a network request based on the user's settings and updating the view's state such as displaying an error message or loading indicator.
Whenever you have an onReceive with an #ObservedObject that sets another (or the same) published value of the #ObservedObject you risk creating an infinite loop if those published attributes are being displayed somehow.
Make your onReceive verify that the received value is actually updating a value, and not merely setting the same value, otherwise it will be setting/redrawing infinitely. In this case, e.g.,:
.onReceive(userSettings.$setting) { setting in
if setting != self.viewModel.state {
self.viewModel.state = setting
}
}
From described scenario I don't see the reason to duplicate setting in view model. You can show the value directly from userSettings, as in
struct HomeView: View {
#EnvironmentObject var userSettings: UserSettings
#ObservedObject var viewModel = TestViewModel()
var body: some View {
Text(userSettings.setting)
}
}
You might be able to prevent infinite re-rendering of the view body by switching your #ObservedObject to #StateObject.

Simpler ViewModel implementation

I'm looking at an example of using SwiftUI with Combine: MVVM with Combine Tutorial for iOS at raywenderlich.com. A ViewModel implementation is given like this:
class WeeklyWeatherViewModel: ObservableObject, Identifiable {
// 2
#Published var city: String = ""
// 3
#Published var dataSource: [DailyWeatherRowViewModel] = []
private let weatherFetcher: WeatherFetchable
// 4
private var disposables = Set<AnyCancellable>()
init(weatherFetcher: WeatherFetchable) {
self.weatherFetcher = weatherFetcher
}
}
So, this makes some sense to me. In a view observing the model, an instance of the ViewModel is declared as an ObservedObject like this:
#ObservedObject var viewModel: WeeklyWeatherViewModel
And then it's possible to make use of the #Published properties in the model in the body definition of the View like this:
TextField("e.g. Cupertino", text: $viewModel.city)
In WeeklyWeatherViewModel Combine is used to take the city text, make a request on it, and turn this in to [DailyWeatherRowViewModel]. Up to here, everything is rosey and makes sense.
Where I become confused is that quite a lot of code is then used to:
Trigger a fetch when city is changed.
Keep hold of the AnyCancellable that's looking up weather data.
Copy the output of the weather look up in to dataSource by a sink on the weather fetch Publisher`
It looks like this:
// More in WeeklyWeatherViewModel
init(
weatherFetcher: WeatherFetchable,
scheduler: DispatchQueue = DispatchQueue(label: "WeatherViewModel")
) {
self.weatherFetcher = weatherFetcher
_ = $city
.dropFirst(1)
.debounce(for: .seconds(0.5), scheduler: scheduler)
.sink(receiveValue: fetchWeather(forCity:))
}
func fetchWeather(forCity city: String) {
weatherFetcher.weeklyWeatherForecast(forCity: city)
.map { response in
response.list.map(DailyWeatherRowViewModel.init)
}
.map(Array.removeDuplicates)
.receive(on: DispatchQueue.main)
.sink(
receiveCompletion: { [weak self] value in
guard let self = self else { return }
switch value {
case .failure:
self.dataSource = []
case .finished:
break
}
},
receiveValue: { [weak self] forecast in
guard let self = self else { return }
self.dataSource = forecast
})
.store(in: &disposables)
}
If I look in Combine for the definition of the #Published propertyWrapper, it seems like all does is provide projectedValue which is a Publisher, which makes it seem like it ought to be possible for WeeklyWeatherViewModel to simply provide the Publisher fetching weather data and for the view to make use of this directly. I don't see why the copying in to a dataSource is necessary.
Basically, what I'm expecting is there to be a way for SwiftUI to directly make use of a Publisher, and for me to be able to put that publisher externally from a View implementation so that I can inject it. But I've no idea what it is.
If this doesn't seem to make any sense, that figures, as I'm confused. Please let me know and I'll see if I can refine my explanation. Thanks!
I don't have a definitive answer to this and I didn't find a magic way to have SwiftUI make use of a Publisher directly – it's entirely possible that there is one that eludes me!
I have found a reasonably compact and flexible approach to achieving the desired result, though. It cut down the use of sink to a single occurrence that attaches to the input (#Published city in the original code), which substantially simplifies the cancelation work.
Here's a fairly generic model that has an #Published input attribute and a #Published output attribute (for which setting is private). It takes a transform as input, and this is used to transform the input publisher, and is then sinked in to the output publisher. The Cancelable of the sink is stored.
final class ObservablePublisher<Input, Output>: ObservableObject, Identifiable {
init(
initialInput: Input,
initialOutput: Output,
publisherTransform: #escaping (AnyPublisher<Input, Never>) -> AnyPublisher<Output, Never>)
{
input = initialInput
output = initialOutput
sinkCancelable =
publisherTransform($input.eraseToAnyPublisher())
.receive(on: DispatchQueue.main)
.sink(receiveValue: { self.output = $0 })
}
#Published var input: Input
#Published private(set) var output: Output
private var sinkCancelable: AnyCancellable? = nil
}
If you wanted a substantially less generic kind of model, you can see it's pretty easy to set up having the input (which is a publisher) be filtered in to the output.
In a view, you might declare an instance of the model and use it like this:
struct SimpleView: View {
#ObservedObject var model: ObservablePublisher<String, String>
var body: some View {
List {
Section {
// Here's the input to the model taken froma text field.
TextField("Give me some input", text: $model.input)
}
Section {
// Here's the models output which the model is getting from a passed Publisher.
Text(model.output)
}
}
.listStyle(GroupedListStyle())
}
}
And here's some silly setup of the view and its model taken from a "SceneDelegate.swift". The model just delays whatever is typed in for a bit.
let model = ObservablePublisher(initialInput: "Moo moo", initialOutput: []) { textPublisher in
return textPublisher
.delay(for: 1, scheduler: DispatchQueue.global())
.eraseToAnyPublisher()
}
let rootView = NavigationView {
AlbumSearchView(model: model)
}
I made the model generic on the Input and Output. I don't know if this will actually be useful in practice, but it seems like it might be.
I'm really new to this, and there might be some terrible flaws in this such as inefficiencies, memory leaks or retain cycles, race conditions, etc. I've not found them yet, though.
You can use URLSessionDataTaskPublisher and refactor out networking from all view models.
If you feel some part of the tutorial seems redundant, that is because it is.
MVVM in such usage is redundant and does not do the job better.
I have a refactored version (networking refactored, all view models removed) of that tutorial if you are interested in details.