问题
Suppose for example we're talking about elements of type Int (but the question still applies to any type)
I have some functionality which needs to loop over a sequence of Ints. But I don't care if behind the scenes this sequence is implemented as an Array, or a Set or any other exotic kind of structure, the only requirement is that we can loop over them.
Swift standard library defines the protocol SequenceType as "A type that can be iterated with a for...in loop". So my instinct is to define a protocol like this:
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : SequenceType<Int> { get }
}
But this doesn't work. SequenceType is not a generic type which can be specialized, it's a protocol. Any particular SequenceType does have a specific type of element, but it's only available as an associated type: SequenceType.Generator.Element
So the question is:
How can we define a protocol which requires a specific type of sequence?
Here's some other things I've tried and why they aren't right:
Fail 1
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : SequenceType { get }
}
Protocol 'SequenceType' can only be used as a generic constraint because it has Self or associated type requirements
Fail 2
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : AnySequence<Int> { get }
}
class ArrayOfInts : HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : [Int] = [0,1,2]
}
I thought this one would work, but when I tried a concrete implementation using an Array we get
Type 'ArrayOfInts' does not conform to protocol 'HasSequenceOfInts'
This is because Array is not AnySequence (to my surprise... my expectation was that AnySequence would match any sequence of Ints)
Fail 3
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
typealias S : SequenceType
var seq : S { get }
}
Compiles, but there's no obligation that the elements of the sequence seq have type Int
Fail 4
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : SequenceType where S.Generator.Element == Int
}
Can't use a where clause there
So now I'm totally out of ideas. I can easily just make my protocol require an Array of Int, but then I'm restricting the implementation for no good reason, and that feels very un-swift.
Update Success
See answer from @rob-napier which explains things very well. My Fail 2 was pretty close. Using AnySequence can work, but in your conforming class you need to make sure you convert from whatever kind of sequence you're using to AnySequence. For example:
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : AnySequence<Int> { get }
}
class ArrayOfInts : HasSequenceOfInts {
var _seq : [Int] = [0,1,2]
var seq : AnySequence<Int> {
get {
return AnySequence(self._seq)
}
}
}
回答1:
There are two sides to this problem:
Accepting an arbitrary sequence of ints
Returning or storing an arbitrary sequence of ints
In the first case, the answer is to use generics. For example:
func iterateOverInts<SeqInt: SequenceType where SeqInt.Generator.Element == Int>(xs: SeqInt) {
for x in xs {
print(x)
}
}
In the second case, you need a type-eraser. A type-eraser is a wrapper that hides the actual type of some underlying implementation and presents only the interface. Swift has several of them in stdlib, mostly prefixed with the word Any. In this case you want AnySequence.
func doubles(xs: [Int]) -> AnySequence<Int> {
return AnySequence( xs.lazy.map { $0 * 2 } )
}
For more on AnySequence and type-erasers in general, see A Little Respect for AnySequence.
If you need it in protocol form (usually you don't; you just need to use a generic as in iterateOverInts), the type eraser is also the tool there:
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : AnySequence<Int> { get }
}
But seq must return AnySequence<Int>. It can't return [Int].
There is one more layer deeper you can take this, but sometimes it creates more trouble than it solves. You could define:
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
typealias SeqInt : IntegerType
var seq: SeqInt { get }
}
But now HasSequenceOfInts has a typealias with all the limitations that implies. SeqInt could be any kind of IntegerType (not just Int), so looks just like a constrained SequenceType, and will generally need its own type eraser. So occasionally this technique is useful, but in your specific case it just gets you basically back where you started. You can't constrain SeqInt to Int here. It has to be to a protocol (of course you could invent a protocol and make Int the only conforming type, but that doesn't change much).
BTW, regarding type-erasers, as you can probably see they're very mechanical. They're just a box that forwards to something else. That suggests that in the future the compiler will be able to auto-generate these type-erasers for us. The compiler has fixed other boxing problems for us over time. For instance, you used to have to create a Box class to hold enums that had generic associated values. Now that's done semi-automatically with indirect. We could imagine a similar mechanism being added to automatically create AnySequence when it's required by the compiler. So I don't think this is a deep "Swift's design doesn't allow it." I think it's just "the Swift compiler doesn't handle it yet."
回答2:
(Tested and working in Swift 4, which introduces the associatedtype constraints needed for this)
Declare your original protocol that things will conform to:
protocol HasSequenceOfInts {
associatedType IntSequence : Sequence where IntSequence.Element == Int
var seq : IntSequence { get }
}
Now, you can just write
class ArrayOfInts : HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq : [Int] = [0,1,2]
}
like you always wanted.
However, if you try to make an array of type [HasSequenceOfInts], or assign it to a variable (or basically do anything with it), you'll get an error that says
Protocol 'HasSequenceOfInts' can only be used as a generic constraint because it has Self or associated type requirements
Now comes the fun part.
We will create another protocol HasSequenceOfInts_ (feel free to choose a more descriptive name) which will not have associated type requirements, and will automatically be conformed to by HasSequenceOfInts:
protocol HasSequenceOfInts: HasSequenceOfInts_ {
associatedType IntSequence : Sequence where IntSequence.Element == Int
var seq : IntSequence { get }
}
protocol HasSequenceOfInts_ {
var seq : AnySequence<Int> { get }
}
extension HasSequenceOfInts_ where Self : HasSequenceOfInts {
var seq_ : AnySequence<Int> {
return AnySequence(seq)
}
}
Note that you never need to need to explicitly conform to HasSequenceOfInts_ , because HasSequenceOfInts already conforms to it, and you get a full implementation for free from the extension.
Now, if you need to make an array or assign an instance of something conforming to this protocol to a variable, use HasSequenceOfInts_ as the type instead of HasSequenceOfInts, and access the seq_ property (note: since function overloading is allowed, if you made a function seq() instead of an instance variable, you could give it the same name and it would work):
let a: HasSequenceOfInts_ = ArrayOfInts()
a.seq_
This needs a bit more setup than the accepted answer, but means you don't have to remember to wrap your return value in AnySequence(...) in every type where you implement the protocol.
回答3:
I believe you need to drop the requirement for it to only be Int's and work around it with generics:
protocol HasSequence {
typealias S : SequenceType
var seq : S { get }
}
struct A : HasSequence {
var seq = [1, 2, 3]
}
struct B : HasSequence {
var seq : Set<String> = ["a", "b", "c"]
}
func printSum<T : HasSequence where T.S.Generator.Element == Int>(t : T) {
print(t.seq.reduce(0, combine: +))
}
printSum(A())
printSum(B()) // Error: B.S.Generator.Element != Int
In Swift's current state, you can't do exactly what you want, maybe in the future though.
回答4:
it is very specific example on request of Daniel Howard
1) type conforming to SequenceType protocol could be almost any sequence, even though Array or Set are both conforming to SequenceType protocol, most of their functionality comes from inheritance on CollectionType (which conforms to SequenceType)
Daniel, try this simple example in your Playground
import Foundation
public struct RandomIntGenerator: GeneratorType, SequenceType {
public func next() -> Int? {
return random()
}
public func nextValue() -> Int {
return next()!
}
public func generate() -> RandomIntGenerator {
return self
}
}
let rs = RandomIntGenerator()
for r in rs {
print(r)
}
As you can see, it conforms to SequenceType protocol and produce infinite stream of Int numbers. Before you will try to implement something, you have to answer yourself few questions
- can i reuse some functionality, which is available 'for free' in standard Swift library?
- am i trying to mimic some functionality which is not supported by Swift? Swift is not C++, Swift is not ObjectiveC ... and lot of constructions we used to use before Swift has no equivalent in Swift.
- Define your question in such way that we can understand you requirements
are you looking for something like this?
protocol P {
typealias Type: SequenceType
var value: Type { get set }
}
extension P {
func foo() {
for v in value {
dump(v)
}
}
}
struct S<T: CollectionType>: P {
typealias Type = T
var value: Type
}
var s = S(value: [Int]())
s.value.append(1)
s.value.append(2)
s.foo()
/*
- 1
- 2
*/
let set: Set<String> = ["alfa", "beta", "gama"]
let s2 = S(value: set)
s2.foo()
/*
- beta
- alfa
- gama
*/
// !!!! WARNING !!!
// this is NOT possible
s = s2
// error: cannot assign value of type 'S<Set<String>>' to type 'S<[Int]>' (aka 'S<Array<Int>>')
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/33843038/define-a-swift-protocol-which-requires-a-specific-type-of-sequence