Scenario:
I had a large view that I want to break up into a container view having couple of child views.
So each view has its own .string file.
The paradigm: dissemination of processes from one file to the children as a 'collective'.
The container view would act as the hub, the intelligence.
I don't want this to be overly complicated; merely modularizing the logic in discrete parts for easy maintenance.
Problem: I can only go one-way #State ---> #Binding between struct Views without going thru a Class Object.
Is there a way to return values; e.g., two-way data exchange?
That is, child views sharing their common views with the parent/container?
View1 | View2 & View2 | View1 <br/>
#State -->#Binding (data) & #Binding <-- #State (result)?
I must I use some sort of singleton class object for the data exchange?
Again, I'm for simplicity of design vs a large single struct View.
Binding is the way a value is "returned" from a child to parent. If the child didn't update the value (i.e. just one-way parent -> child, then you wouldn't need a binding - just pass the variable in an init).
struct Child: View {
#Binding var num: Int
var body: some View {
VStack {
Text("\(num)")
Button("increase") { self.num += 1 }
}
}
}
struct Parent: View {
#State var sharedNum: Int = 0
var body: some View {
VStack {
Text("\(sharedNum)")
Child(num: $sharedNum)
Child(num: $sharedNum)
}
.onChange(of: sharedNum) { print("shared num", $0) } // iOS14 required
}
}
Both children and the parent would display the same number regardless of which of the children changed it.
But, sometimes a child might need to notify the parent not necessarily through a value change. Then you could use a callback:
struct Child: View {
var onClick: (Int) -> Void
var body: some View {
Button("generate random") {
onClick(Int.random(1...100))
}
}
}
struct Parent: View {
var body: some View {
Child {
print("new random", $0)
}
}
}
Related
Cow you give me some confirmation about my understanding about #ObservedObject and #EnvironmentObject?
In my mind, using an #ObservedObject is useful when we send data "in line" between views that are sequenced, just like in "prepare for" in UIKit while using #EnvironmentObject is more like "singleton" in UIKit. My question is, is my code making the right use of these two teniques? Is this the way are applied in real development?
my model used as brain for funcions (IE urls sessions, other data manipulations)
class ModelClass_ViaObservedObject: ObservableObject {
#Published var isOn: Bool = true
}
class ModelClass_ViaEnvironment: ObservableObject {
#Published var message: String = "default"
}
my main view
struct ContentView: View {
//way to send data in views step by step
#StateObject var modelClass_ViaObservedObject = ModelClass_ViaObservedObject()
//way to share data more or less like a singleton
#StateObject var modelClass_ViaEnvironment = ModelClass_ViaEnvironment()
var myBackgroundColorView: Color {
if modelClass_ViaObservedObject.isOn {
return Color.green
} else {
return Color.red
}
}
var body: some View {
NavigationView {
ZStack {
myBackgroundColorView
VStack {
NavigationLink(destination:
SecondView(modelClass_viaObservedObject: modelClass_ViaObservedObject)
) {
Text("Go to secondary view")
.padding()
.overlay(
RoundedRectangle(cornerRadius: 16)
.stroke(.black, lineWidth: 1)
)
}
Text("text received from second view: \(modelClass_ViaEnvironment.message)")
}
}
.navigationTitle("Titolo")
.navigationBarTitleDisplayMode(.inline)
}
.environmentObject(modelClass_ViaEnvironment)
}
}
my second view
struct SecondView: View {
#Environment(\.dismiss) var dismiss
#ObservedObject var modelClass_viaObservedObject: ModelClass_ViaObservedObject
//global data in environment, not sent step by step view by view
#EnvironmentObject var modelClass_ViaEnvironment: ModelClass_ViaEnvironment
var body: some View {
VStack(spacing: 5) {
Text("Second View")
Button("change bool for everyone") {
modelClass_viaObservedObject.isOn.toggle()
dismiss()
}
TextField("send back", text: $modelClass_ViaEnvironment.message)
Text(modelClass_ViaEnvironment.message)
}
}
}
No, we use #State for view data like if a toggle isOn, which can either be a single value itself or a custom struct containing multiple values and mutating funcs. We pass it down the View hierarchy by declaring a let in the child View or use #Binding var if we need write access. Regardless of if we declare it let or #Binding whenever a different value is passed in to the child View's init, SwiftUI will call body automatically (as long as it is actually accessed in body that is).
#StateObject is for when a single value or a custom struct won't do and we need a reference type instead for view data, i.e. if persisting or syncing data (not using the new async/await though because we use .task for that). The object is init before body is called (usually before it is about to appear) and deinit when the View is no longer needed (usually after it disappears).
#EnvironmentObject is usually for the store object that holds model structs in #Published properties and is responsible for saving or syncing,. The difference is the model data is not tied to any particular View, like #State and #StateObject are for view data. This object is usually a singleton, one for the app and one with sample data for when previewing, because it should never be deinit. The advantage of #EnvironmentObject over #ObservedObject is we don't need to pass it down through each View as a let that don't need the object when we only need it further down the hierarchy. Note the reason it has to be passed down as a let and not #ObservedObject is then body would be needlessly called in the intermediate Views because SwiftUI's dependency tracking doesn't work for objects only value types.
Here is some sample code:
struct MyConfig {
var isOn = false
var message = ""
mutating func reset() {
isOn = false
message = ""
}
}
struct MyView: View {
#State var config = MyConfig() // grouping vars into their struct makes use of value semantics to track changes (a change to any of its properties is detected as a change to the struct itself) and offers testability.
var body: some View {
HStack {
ViewThatOnlyReads(config: config)
ViewThatWrites(config: $config)
}
}
}
struct ViewThatOnlyReads: View {
let config: MyConfig
var body: some View {
Text(config.isOn ? "It's on" : "It's off")
}
}
struct ViewThatWrites: View {
#Binding var config: MyConfig
var body: some View {
Toggle("Is On", isOn: $config.isOn)
}
}
(You can skip this part and just look at the code.) I'm creating a complicated form. The form creates, say, a Post object, but I want to be able to create several Comment objects at the same time. So I have a Post form and a Comment form. In my Post form, I can fill out the title, description, etc., and I can add several Comment forms as I create more comments. Each form has an #ObservedObject viewModel of its own type. So I have one parent Post #ObservedObject viewModel, and another #ObservedObject viewModel for the array of the Comment objects which is also a #ObservedObject viewModel.
I hope that made some sense -- here is code to minimally reproduce the issue (unrelated to Posts/Comments). The objective is to make the count of the "Childish" viewModels at the parent level count up like how they count up for the "Child" view.
import Combine
import SwiftUI
final class ParentScreenViewModel: ObservableObject {
#Published var childScreenViewModel = ChildScreenViewModel()
}
struct ParentScreen: View {
#StateObject private var viewModel = ParentScreenViewModel()
var body: some View {
Form {
NavigationLink(destination: ChildScreen(viewModel: viewModel.childScreenViewModel)) {
Text("ChildishVMs")
Spacer()
Text("\(viewModel.childScreenViewModel.myViewModelArray.count)") // FIXME: this count is never updated
}
}
}
}
struct ParentScreen_Previews: PreviewProvider {
static var previews: some View {
ParentScreen()
}
}
// MARK: - ChildScreenViewModel
final class ChildScreenViewModel: ObservableObject {
#Published var myViewModelArray: [ChildishViewModel] = []
func appendAnObservedObject() {
objectWillChange.send() // FIXME: does not work
myViewModelArray.append(ChildishViewModel())
}
}
struct ChildScreen: View {
#ObservedObject private var viewModel: ChildScreenViewModel
init(viewModel: ChildScreenViewModel = ChildScreenViewModel()) {
self.viewModel = viewModel
}
var body: some View {
Button {
viewModel.appendAnObservedObject()
} label: {
Text("Append a ChildishVM (current num: \(viewModel.myViewModelArray.count))")
}
}
}
struct ChildScreen_Previews: PreviewProvider {
static var previews: some View {
ChildScreen()
}
}
final class ChildishViewModel: ObservableObject {
#Published var myProperty = "hey!"
}
ParentView:
ChildView:
I can't run this in previews either -- seems to need to be run in the simulator. There are lots of questions similar to this one but not quite like it (e.g. the common answer of manually subscribing to the child's changes using Combine does not work). Would using #EnvironmentObject help somehow? Thanks!
First get rid of the view model objects, we don't use those in SwiftUI. The View data struct is already the model for the actual views on screen e.g. UILabels, UITables etc. that SwiftUI updates for us. It takes advantage of value semantics to resolve consistency bugs you typically get with objects, see Choosing Between Structures and Classes. SwiftUI structs uses property wrappers like #State to make these super-fast structs have features like objects. If you use actual objects on top of the View structs then you are slowing down SwiftUI and re-introducing the consistency bugs that Swift and SwiftUI were designed to eliminate - which seems to me is exactly the problem you are facing. So it of course is not a good idea to use Combine to resolve consistency issues between objects it'll only make the problem worse.
So with that out of the way, you just need correct some mistakes in your design. Model types should be structs (these can be arrays or nested structs) and have a single model object to manage the life-cycle and side effects of the struct. You can have structs within structs and use bindings to pass them between your Views when you need write access, if you don't then its simply a let and SwiftUI will automatically call body whenever a View is init with a different let from last time.
Here is a basic example:
struct Post: Identifiable {
let id = UUID()
var text = ""
}
class Model: ObservableObject {
#Published var posts: [Post] = []
// func load
// func save
// func delete a post by ID
}
struct ModelController {
static let shared = ModelController()
let model = Model()
//static var preview: ModelController {
// ...
//}()
}
#main
struct TestApp: App {
var body: some Scene {
WindowGroup {
ContentView()
.environmentObject(ModelController.shared.model)
}
}
}
struct ContentView: View {
#EnvironmentObject var model: Model
var body: some View {
ForEach($model.posts) { $post in
ContentView2(post: post)
}
}
}
struct ContentView_Previews: PreviewProvider {
static var previews: some View {
ContentView().environmentObject(ModelController.shared.preview)
}
}
struct ConventView2: View {
#Binding var post: Post
var body: some View {
TextField("Enter Text", text: $post.text)
}
}
For a more detail check out Apple's Fruta and Scrumdinger samples.
I'm trying to simplify the ContentView within a project and I'm struggling to understand how to move #State based logic into its own file and have ContentView adapt to any changes. Currently I have dynamic views that display themselves based on #Binding actions which I'm passing the $binding down the view hierarchy to have buttons toggle the bool values.
Here's my current attempt. I'm not sure how in SwiftUI to change the view state of SheetPresenter from a nested view without passing the $binding all the way down the view stack. Ideally I'd like it to look like ContentView.overlay(sheetPresenter($isOpen, $present).
Also, I'm learning SwiftUI so if this isn't the best approach please provide guidance.
class SheetPresenter: ObservableObject {
#Published var present: Present = .none
#State var isOpen: Bool = false
enum Present {
case none, login, register
}
#ViewBuilder
func makeView(with presenter: Present) -> some View {
switch presenter {
case .none:
EmptyView()
case .login:
BottomSheetView(isOpen: $isOpen, maxHeight: UIConfig.Utils.screenHeight * 0.75) {
LoginScreen()
}
case .register:
BottomSheetView(isOpen: $isOpen, maxHeight: UIConfig.Utils.screenHeight * 0.75) {
RegisterScreen()
}
}
}
}
if you don't want to pass $binding all the way down the view you can create a StateObject variable in the top view and pass it with .environmentObject(). and access it from any view with EnvironmentObject
struct testApp: App {
#StateObject var s1: sViewModel = sViewModel()
var body: some Scene {
WindowGroup {
ContentView()
.environmentObject(s1)
}
}
}
You are correct this is not the best approach, however it is a common mistake. In SwiftUI we actually use #State for transient data owned by the view. This means using a value type like a struct, not classes. This is explained at 4:18 in Data Essentials in SwiftUI from WWDC 2020.
EditorConfig can maintain invariants on its properties and be tested
independently. And because EditorConfig is a value type, any change to
a property of EditorConfig, like its progress, is visible as a change
to EditorConfig itself.
struct EditorConfig {
var isEditorPresented = false
var note = ""
var progress: Double = 0
mutating func present(initialProgress: Double) {
progress = initialProgress
note = ""
isEditorPresented = true
}
}
struct BookView: View {
#State private var editorConfig = EditorConfig()
func presentEditor() { editorConfig.present(…) }
var body: some View {
…
Button(action: presentEditor) { … }
…
}
}
Then you just use $editorConfig.isEditorPresented as the boolean binding in .sheet or .overlay.
Worth also taking a look at sheet(item:onDismiss:content:) which makes it much simpler to show an item because no boolean is required it uses an optional #State which you can set to nil to dismiss.
When I update a binding property from an array in a pushed view 2+ layers down, the navigation pops back instantly after a change to the property.
Xcode 13.3 beta, iOS 15.
I created a simple demo and code is below.
Shopping Lists
List Edit
List section Edit
Updating the list title (one view deep) is fine, navigation stack stays same, and changes are published if I return. But when adjusting a section title (two deep) the navigation pops back as soon as I make a single change to the property.
I have a feeling I'm missing basic fundamentals here, and I have a feeling it must be related to the lists id? but I'm struggling to figure it out or work around it.
GIF
Code:
Models:
struct ShoppingList {
let id: String = UUID().uuidString
var title: String
var sections: [ShoppingListSection]
}
struct ShoppingListSection {
let id: String = UUID().uuidString
var title: String
}
View Model:
final class ShoppingListsViewModel: ObservableObject {
#Published var shoppingLists: [ShoppingList] = [
.init(
title: "Shopping List 01",
sections: [
.init(title: "Fresh food")
]
)
]
}
Content View:
struct ContentView: View {
var body: some View {
NavigationView {
ShoppingListsView()
}
}
}
ShoppingListsView
struct ShoppingListsView: View {
#StateObject private var viewModel = ShoppingListsViewModel()
var body: some View {
List($viewModel.shoppingLists, id: \.id) { $shoppingList in
NavigationLink(destination: ShoppingListEditView(shoppingList: $shoppingList)) {
Text(shoppingList.title)
}
}
.navigationBarTitle("Shopping Lists")
}
}
ShoppingListEditView
struct ShoppingListEditView: View {
#Binding var shoppingList: ShoppingList
var body: some View {
Form {
Section(header: Text("Title")) {
TextField("Title", text: $shoppingList.title)
}
Section(header: Text("Sections")) {
List($shoppingList.sections, id: \.id) { $section in
NavigationLink(destination: ShoppingListSectionEditView(section: $section)) {
Text(section.title)
}
}
}
}
.navigationBarTitle("Edit list")
}
}
ShoppingListSectionEditView
struct ShoppingListSectionEditView: View {
#Binding var section: ShoppingListSection
var body: some View {
Form {
Section(header: Text("Title")) {
TextField("title", text: $section.title)
}
}
.navigationBarTitle("Edit section")
}
}
try this, works for me:
struct ContentView: View {
var body: some View {
NavigationView {
ShoppingListsView()
}.navigationViewStyle(.stack) // <--- here
}
}
Try to make you object confirm to Identifiable and return value which unique and stable, for your case is ShoppingList.
Detail view seems will pop when object id changed.
The reason your stack is popping back to the root ShoppingListsView is that the change in the list is published and the root ShoppingListsView is registered to listen for updates to the #StateObject.
Therefore, any change to the list is listened to by ShoppingListsView, causing that view to be re-rendered and for all new views on the stack to be popped in order to render the root ShoppingListsView, which is listening for updates on the #StateObject.
The solution to this is to change the #StateObject to #EnvironmentObject
Please refactor your code to change ShoppingListsViewModel to use an #EnvironmentObject wrapper instead of a #StateObject wrapper
You may pass the environment object in to all your child views and also add a boolean #Published flag to track any updates to the data.
Then your ShoppingListView would look as below
struct ShoppingListsView: View {
#EnvironmentObject var viewModel = ShoppingListsViewModel()
var body: some View {
List($viewModel.shoppingLists, id: \.id) { $shoppingList in
NavigationLink(destination: ShoppingListEditView(shoppingList: $shoppingList)) {
Text(shoppingList.title)
}
}
.navigationBarTitle("Shopping Lists")
}
}
Don't forget to pass the viewModel in to all your child views.
That should fix your problem.
I have been reading about the property wrappers in SwiftUI and I see that they do a great job, but one thing which I really don't get is the difference between #EnvironmentObject and #ObservedObject.
From what I learned so far, I see that #EnvironmentObject is used when we have an object that is needed in various places in our app but we don't need to pass it through all of them. For example if we have hierarchy A -> B -> C -> D and the object is created at A, it is saved in the environment so that we can pass it directly from A to D, if D needs it.
If we use #ObservedObject which is created at A and needs to be passed to D, then we need to go through B and C as well.
But I still don't know how to decide which one to use.
Here are 2 example projects which I made:
struct ContentView2: View {
var order = Order2()
var body: some View {
VStack {
EditView2()
DisplayView2()
}
.environmentObject(order)
}
}
struct EditView2: View {
#EnvironmentObject var user: Order2
var body: some View {
HStack{
TextField("Fruit", text: $user.item)
}
}
}
struct DisplayView2: View {
#EnvironmentObject var user: Order2
var body: some View {
VStack{
Text(user.item)
}
}
}
class Order2: ObservableObject {
#Published var item = "Orange"
}
and
struct ContentView: View {
var order = Order()
var body: some View {
VStack {
EditView(order: order)
DisplayView(order: order)
}
}
}
struct EditView: View {
#ObservedObject var order: Order
var body: some View {
HStack{
TextField("Fruit", text: $order.item)
}
}
}
struct DisplayView: View {
#ObservedObject var order: Order
var body: some View {
VStack{
Text(order.item)
}
}
}
class Order: ObservableObject {
#Published var item = "Apple"
}
Both codes do the same update of the view. Also both ContentViews, pass an Order object. The difference is that Environment passes .environmentObject(order) and Observed passes it directly EditView(order: order). For me, both do same job, only their declaration is different, therefore I would appreciate some explanation or a better example.
As you've noticed an #ObservedObject needs to be passed from view to view. It may be better for a simple view hierarchy when you don't have too many views.
Let's assume you have the following hierarchy:
ViewA -> ViewB -> ViewC -> ViewD
Now if you want your #ObservedObject from the ViewA to be in the ViewB there's no problem with passing it directly in init.
But what if you want it in the ViewD as well? And what if you don't need it in the ViewB and ViewC?
With an #ObservedObject you'd need to manually pass it from the ViewA to the ViewB and then to the ViewC, and then to the ViewD. And you'd need to declare it in every child view.
With an #EnvironmentObject it's easy - just pass it to the top-level view:
ViewA().environmentObject(someObservableObject)
Then you only declare it in the view that uses it - this may make your code more readable.
Note
Every object in the environment (view hierarchy) can access the injected #EnvironmentObject. If you don't want this (privacy is important) you may need to pass it as an #ObservedObject instead.