On 17.07.2017 4:51, Glen Huang via swift-users wrote:
Thanks for the code sample and link, but if I’m not wrong, this pattern doesn’t allow
heterogeneous items.
Support the question. Trying to understand if we can have something like
[AnyHashable] for our custom protocol(with associated type) or AnyHashable has a very
special support from compiler and we can use only [Any] or such kind of wrapper:
struct AnyMyProtocol {
let actualInstance: Any
init<T: MyProtocol>(_ instance: T) { actualInstance = instance}
}
let instances: [AnyMyProtocol] = [AnyMyProtocol(...), AnyMyProtocol(...)]
if let some = instances[0].actualInstance as?
SpecificImplementationOfMyProtocol {
// use 'some' as SpecificImplementationMyProtocol instance
// seems like no way to refer to just MyProtocol
}
If I have these definitions:
struct Chicken {}
struct Pig {}
class ChickenFarm: Farm {
func grow() -> Chicken {
return Chicken()
}
}
class PigFarm: Farm {
func grow() -> Pig {
return Pig()
}
}
Then:
var farms = // How do I define a set that can contain both ChickenFarm and
PigFarm?
farms.insert(AnyFarm<Chicken>(ChickenFarm()))
farms.insert(AnyFarm<Pig>(PigFarm()))
On 17 Jul 2017, at 4:02 AM, Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky
<nevin.brackettrozin...@gmail.com <mailto:nevin.brackettrozin...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The standard pattern for type-erasure in Swift looks like this:
protocol Farm {
associatedtype Produce
func grow() -> Produce
}
private class _AnyFarmBase<T> : Farm {
func grow() -> T { fatalError() }
}
private final class _AnyFarmBox<U: Farm>: _AnyFarmBase<U.Produce> {
var farm: U
init(_ x: U) { farm = x }
override func grow() -> U.Produce {
return farm.grow()
}
}
public final class AnyFarm<V> : Farm {
private let wrapped: _AnyFarmBase<V>
func grow() -> V { return wrapped.grow() }
init<W: Farm> (_ x: W) where W.Produce == V {
wrapped = _AnyFarmBox(x)
}
}
There is one little hiccough when you need an initializer in the abstract base
class, which you can read about here
<https://www.bignerdranch.com/blog/breaking-down-type-erasures-in-swift/> among
other places.
Hope that helps,
Nevin
On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Glen Huang via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org
<mailto:swift-users@swift.org>> wrote:
This sounds like the right approach!
However, as I experimented with AnyHashable more, I found out that after
converting a concrete type to it, I could still convert back using “as”:
AnyHashable(Foo()) as! Foo
I guess that’s not the case with AnyNamed? I tried to imitate AnyHashable:
struct AnyNamed: Named {
let base: Any
init<T: Named>(_ value: T) {
base = value
}
var name: String {
// How do I convert `base` to `Named` here?
}
}
But I have no idea what to put in `var name: String`. Also, even if we
managed
to come up with a solution, would it magically allow direct casting with
“as”?
Does the complier do something special for AnyHashable?
> On 16 Jul 2017, at 12:58 AM, Ole Begemann <o...@oleb.net
<mailto:o...@oleb.net>> wrote:
>
> One way to do this in Swift is a method called type erasure.
>
> Type erasure means you create a new type that wraps any value whose
concrete
type you want to erase. This new type also conforms to the protocol. By
convention the type is named Any... (compare AnyIterator and AnySequence in
the
standard library, which do the same thing).
>
> struct AnyNamed: Named {
> private let _name: () -> String
>
> init<T: Named>(_ value: T) {
> _name = { value.name <http://value.name/> }
> }
>
> var name: String {
> return _name()
> }
> }
>
> AnyNamed is initialized with a generic value T: Named. Notice that the
initializer is generic, but the type itself isn't. Because AnyNamed can't
store
value: T directly (then it would have to be generic over T), we create a
closure over value.name <http://value.name/> and store that instead.
>
> Now we can create a Set<AnyNamed> and, because AnyNamed conforms to Named,
treat the set's elements as values conforming to Named:
>
> var set = Set<AnyNamed>()
> set.insert(AnyNamed(Foo()))
> set.insert(AnyNamed(Bar()))
>
> for element in set {
> print(element.name <http://element.name/>)
> print(element.hashValue)
> }
>
>
> On 11.07.2017 12:10, Glen Huang via swift-users wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I want to store some heterogeneous items all conform to a protocol
inside a
set, is it something possible to do in swift?
>>
>> I tried this example:
>>
>> ```
>> protocol Named: Hashable {
>> var name: String { get }
>> }
>>
>> extension Named {
>> var hashValue: Int {
>> return name.hashValue
>> }
>>
>> static func ==(lhs: Self, rhs: Self) -> Bool {
>> return lhs.name <http://lhs.name/> == rhs.name <http://rhs.name/>
>> }
>> }
>>
>> struct Foo: Named {
>> var name = "foo"
>> }
>>
>> struct Bar: Named {
>> var name = "bar"
>> }
>>
>> var item = Set<Named>()
>> item.insert(Foo())
>> item.insert(Bar())
>> ```
>>
>> But it failed at `Set<Named>()` where it complained "Using 'Named' as a
concrete type conforming to protocol 'Hashable' is not supported”.
>>
>> After watching the WWDC session "Protocol-Oriented Programming in Swift”
by
Dave Abrahams, I try to use protocols whenever possible. But I can’t seem to
overcome this barrier. Set.Element must confirm to Hashable, which inherits
from Equatable, which has self requirement, which ultimately means that
Set.Element all must be of the same type. So it seems it’s impossible to
have
heterogeneous items using protocol. Is that the case?
>>
>> My use case is this:
>>
>> I have an object that can contain two sets of other objects:
>>
>> ```
>> class Parent {
>> var foos: Set<Foo>
>> var bars: Set<Bar>
>> }
>> ```
>>
>> I want to define a computed property “all” that is the union of the two
sets. Foo and Bar conform to the same protocol. I wonder what return type I
should use for the union? Do I have to go back to OOP and define a super
class
for Foo and Bar?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-users mailing list
>> swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
<https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users>
>
>
_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
<https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users>
_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
