Could anybody help me to clarify in which situations is better to use functions as the struct fields and when as the methods of struct?
A field of function type is not a method, so it's not part of the method set of the struct type. A "true" method declared with the struct type as the receiver will be part of the method set.
That being said, if you want to implement an interface, you have no choice but to define "true" methods.
Methods are "attached" to concrete types and cannot be changed at runtime. A field of function type may be used to "mimic" virtual methods, but as said above, this is not a method. A field of function type may be reassigned at runtime.
Like in this example:
type Foo struct {
Bar func()
}
func main() {
f := Foo{
Bar: func() { fmt.Println("initial") },
}
f.Bar()
f.Bar = func() { fmt.Println("changed") }
f.Bar()
}
Which outputs (try it on the Go Playground):
initial
changed
Fields of function type are often used to store callback functions. Examples from the standard lib are http.Server and http.Transport.
I don't really understand why we can use delegated properties inside functions. We cannot create properties inside functions because inside functions we can only create variables.
How come is possible creating a delegated property inside a function then?
This line of code is a delegated property inside a function and I don't understand why is that possible.
val scoreFragmentArgs by navArgs<ScoreFragmentArgs>()
It has getters and setters and it doesn't make sense to me
Kotlin Delegates are based on storing the delegate object, and delegating getting/setting of the changes to it. So, it is possible to inline getValue calls when accessing to delegated variable.
For example:
import kotlin.properties.ReadOnlyProperty
import kotlin.reflect.KProperty
object Delegate : ReadOnlyProperty<Any?, Int> {
override fun getValue(thisRef: Any?, property: KProperty<*>): Int = 42
}
fun main() {
val foo by Delegate
println(foo)
}
The main method in Java will look like:
static final KProperty[] $$delegatedProperties = new KProperty[]{(KProperty)Reflection.property0(new PropertyReference0Impl(Reflection.getOrCreateKotlinPackage(MainKt.class, "123"), "foo", "<v#0>"))};
public static void main() {
System.out.println(Delegate.INSTANCE.getValue(null, $$delegatedProperties[0]));
}
As you see, accessing the variable is replaced by calling getValue.
I have a class that registers itself as an event handler, with an event service:
interface CommunicationService {
fun sendActivationMessage(toEmail: String)
}
abstract class EventCommunicationService : CommunicationService, AbstractEventHandler {
constructor(eventService: EventService) {
eventService.registerListener(this)
}
override fun onEvent(event: Event) {
if (event.type == EventType.USER_CREATED) {
sendActivationMessage(event.userEmail)
}
}
}
The idea being there can be an EmailCommunicationService, or a mocked testing version, etc. which don't all need to register themselves as listeners for when a user is created.
However Kotlin complains that I'm:
Leaking 'this' in constructor of non-final class EventCommunicationService
Which, well, I am. I could easily ignore the warning - but is there a better approach?
I've tried using an init { } block instead of a constructor, but the warning is the same.
I basically want a "post-construct" callback or similar that can be used to let this service register itself with the EventService provided in the constructor since that's the point of this intermediate type.
I understand why this is a problem - but I'm not sure how to reason my way to fixing it.
init blocks are really part of the constructor (in JVM terms), so that wouldn't help with the problem. It is very much not safe to ignore in general: see Leaking this in constructor warning for reasons (just ignore the accepted answer, its comments contain the real meat and so does Ishtar's answer).
One option (assumes that all subclasses have no-argument constructors, though it could be extended):
abstract class <T : EventCommunicationService> EventCommunicationServiceCompanion(private val creator: () -> T) {
operator fun invoke(eventService: EventService): T {
val obj = creator()
eventService.registerListener(obj)
return obj
}
}
// a subclass of EventCommunicationService:
class MyService private constructor () : EventCommunicationService {
companion object : EventCommunicationServiceCompanion<MyService>(MyService::new)
}
To create a MyService, you still call MyService(eventService), but this is actually the companion object's invoke method and not the constructor.
In Kotlin, is it possible to declare a generic function type as the return type of a function?
What I want to achieve would look like this in Java:
interface Factory {
static Factory INSTANCE = new FactoryImpl();
<T> T create(String name, Class<T> type);
}
class PrefixedFactory implements Factory {
private final String prefix;
PrefixedFactory(String prefix) {
this.prefix = prefix;
}
#Override
public <T> T create(String name, Class<T> type) {
return Factory.INSTANCE.create(prefix + name, type);
}
}
(Note that in the example I access the Factory instance using the static field to avoid passing a generic function as a parameter, which would present its own problems in Kotlin).
I would like convert the prefixer to a kotlin function, but it seems to be impossible to declare a generic function as the return type:
fun prefixer(prefix: String): <T> (String, KClass<T>) -> T { TODO() }
This of course does not compile. It seems to me that this is a limitation compared to Java's functional interfaces. Is there a way to accomplish this, or a workaround?
(Edit) Clarification
I want the actual result function to be generic. If I do
fun <T: Any> prefixer(prefix: String): (String, KClass<T>) -> T { TODO() }
as the current answers suggest; I don't get a generic function, instead I get (String, KClass<Foo>) -> Foo if I call prefixer<Foo>(""). So that function can only be called with Foo, while the factory function prefixer in that case is generic, the result is not. I hope that clears up the misunderstandings.
My use case is in a Gradle plugin, where I wrote a helper method similar to this one that applies some defaults to each task created:
val myPrefix = "..."
val project: Project = <from context>
fun <T: Task> String.task(type: KClass<T>, doConfig: T.() -> Unit) {
project.tasks.create("$prefix$this", type.java, { it.doConfig() })
}
Note that the project comes in as closure. Now I want to reuse that helper in a different plugin, so I would like to create this function using a factory for different project instances.
You're doing it almost correctly. You only need to define the generic part at the prefixer function directly.
fun <T: Any> prefixer(prefix: String): (String, KClass<T>) -> T { TODO() }
Depending on you actual implementation, you could have a look at the reified keyword.
No, it isn't possible (as far as I know). The technical term for such a type is "higher-kinded type" and very few languages support them, on JVM I only know of Scala.
If someone asked me the same question without having an interface like Factory, I'd suggest creating exactly this interface as a workaround.
The following line does compile:
fun <T : Any> prefixer(prefix: String): (String, KClass<T>) -> T = TODO()
First, the generic deceleration should be right after the fun keyword.
Then it has has to be declared as type Any. The default is Any? but KClass only takes Any.
Although I was disappointed to read #Alexey's answer, I found a more streamlined workaround taking advantage of Kotlin's operators. The following makes it look more like a lambda when used:
private class Prefixer(private val: String) {
operator fun <T> invoke(name: String, type: Class<T>): T {
TODO()
}
}
To use it:
val createMy = Prefixer("MyPrefix")
val result = createMy("Configuration", Configuration::class.java)
Feel free to replace with KClass where necessary. I was actually using this for a slightly different purpose.
I always thought functions and methods were the same, until I was learning Swift through the "Swift Programming Language" eBook. I found out that I cannot use greet("John", "Tuesday") to call a function that I declared inside a class, as shown in the eBook in the screen shot below:
I received a error saying that "Missing argument label 'day:' in call" as per this screen shot:
Here is the code:-
import Foundation
import UIKit
class ViewController2: UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
//var dailyStatement = greet("John", "Tuesday")
var dailyStatement = greet("John", day: "Tuesday")
println(dailyStatement)
}
func greet(name: String, day: String) -> String {
return "Hello \(name), today is \(day)."
}
}
After some research, I found this post: Difference between a method and a function, and it seems to me that the function that I declared inside a class is actually called a method. So, the syntax that I use to call the method is different compared to the syntax that I use to call a function.
I never realized this difference when I was programming in Objective-C.
What are the differences between functions and methods in Swift?
When do we use functions and when do we use methods in Swift?
After a few hours of reading and experimenting, here are the things that I found out:-
Functions in Swift
Functions are self-contained chunks of code that perform a specific
task. You give a function a name that identifies what it does, and
this name is used to “call” the function to perform its task when
needed.
Resource: Official Apple Documentation on Functions in Swift
Function Parameter Names
However, these parameter names are only used within the body of the
function itself, and cannot be used when calling the function. These
kinds of parameter names are known as local parameter names, because
they are only available for use within the function’s body.
It means that by default, all the parameters for Function are local parameters.
But, sometimes we want to indicate the purpose of each parameter. So, we can actually define an external parameter name for each parameter. Example Code:
func someFunction(externalParameterName localParameterName: Int) {
// function body goes here, and can use localParameterName
// to refer to the argument value for that parameter
}
Another way to make the external parameter name is using hash symbol (#) to shorten the name.
func someFunction(#localParameterName: Int) {
// function body goes here, and can use localParameterName
// to refer to the argument value for that parameter
}
To call the above functions with external parameter, you may use
someFunction(localParameterName:10)
Methods in Swift
Methods are functions that are associated with a particular type.
Classes, structures, and enumerations can all define instance methods,
which encapsulate specific tasks and functionality for working with an
instance of a given type.
Resource: Official Apple Documentation on Methods in Swift
However, the default behavior of local names and external names is
different for functions and methods.
Specifically, Swift gives the first parameter name in a method a local
parameter name by default, and gives the second and subsequent
parameter names both local and external parameter names by default.
Code below shows the differences for default and non-default parameters for method in Swift.
import Foundation
import UIKit
class ViewController2: UIViewController {
override func viewDidLoad() {
super.viewDidLoad()
//Default methods calling
var dailyStatement = greet("Rick", day: "Tuesday")
println(dailyStatement)
//First parameter is also an external parameter
var dailyStatement2 = greet2(name:"John", day: "Sunday")
println(dailyStatement2)
}
//Default: First Parameter is the local parameter, the rest are external parameters
func greet (name: String, day: String) -> String {
return "Hello \(name), today is \(day)."
}
//Use Hash symbol to make the First parameter as external parameter
func greet2 (#name: String, day: String) -> String {
return "Hello \(name), today is \(day)."
}
}
I might miss some important details. Hope someone can provide a better answer.
As you said yourself, methods are functions, but in a class. In objective-c you never realized this, because we were only coding in classes. Every function that we wrote was a method of a class (ViewController or some other class we created).
In Swift we have the ability to create functions that are not inside some class. The main reason for doing this is to write functions that are not tied to any class, and can be used wherever we need them. So if you have a function that is related to a class you write it inside the class and you can access is from every instance of the class:
class Square {
var length: Double
func area() -> Double {
return length * length
}
}
But if you need to access the function from everywhere, then you don't write it inside a class. For example:
func squared(number: Int) -> Int {
return number * number
}
About your syntax issues between functions and methods: You guessed it right, methods and functions are called a little bit differently. That is because in Objective-C we had long method names and we liked them because we could read what the methods were doing and what the parameters were for. So the first parameter in a method is in most cases described by the function name itself. And the other parameters shouldn't only be some numbers or strings or instances, they should be described as well, so Swift writes the name of the variable automatically. If you want to describe it by yourself you can do that as well:
class Something {
func desc(firstString string1: String, secondString string2:String) {...}
}
Well, #Ricky's answer says it pretty much. I was confused what exactly they are. So here is my thought:
Functions could be defined outside of classes or inside of classes/structs/enums, while Methods have to be defined inside of and part of classes/structs/enums.
We could define a Function outside of any Type's definition and could use it within Methods of any Type's definition.
Just my understanding and illustration here, hope this helps someone else or you may edit if you feel there is an improvement needed OR let me know if anything is wrong:
//This is a Function which prints a greeting message based on the category defined in an 'enum'
func greet(yourName name: String, category: GreetingsCategory) {
switch category {
case .Person:
print("Hello, " + name + " Today is Tuesday")
case .Vehicle:
print("Hello, " + name + " your Vehicle is a Car")
}
}
//This is an 'enum' for greetings categories
enum GreetingsCategory: String {
case Person
case Vehicle
}
//Type: Person
class Person {
//This is a method which acts only on Person type
func personGreeting() {
greet(yourName: "Santosh", category: .Person)
}
}
//Type: Vehicle
class Vehicle {
//This is a method which acts only on Vehicle type
func vehicleGreeting() {
greet(yourName: "Santosh", category: .Vehicle)
}
}
//Now making use of our Function defined above by calling methods of defferent types.
let aPerson = Person()
aPerson.personGreeting()
//prints : Hello, Santosh Today is Tuesday
let aVehicle = Vehicle()
aVehicle.vehicleGreeting()
//prints: Hello, Santosh your Vehicle is a Car
//We can also call the above function directly
greet(yourName: "Santosh", category: .Person)
Mainly the names are used interchangeably without people having a real intent of distinguishing them. But ultimately they do have a difference.
someFile.swift:
func someFunc{
//some code
}
class someClass{
func someMethod{
//some code
}
}
Note: someClass != someFile
someMethod works only on its associated type which is 'someClass'. However the same can't be said for someFunc. someFunc is only in the someClass.Swift because semantically it is better suited to be written in that file. It could have been written in any other class as long as it's marked with private
And obviously the method can access self. With functions, there is no self.. For more see: What's the difference between a method and a function?
Here is a simple answer on the difference between functions and methods:
Some folks use “function” and “method” interchangeably, but there’s a
small difference: both of them are reusable chunks of code, but
methods belong to classes, structs, and enums, whereas functions do
not.
So:
func thisIsAFunction() {
}
struct Person {
func thisIsAMethod() {
}
}
Because methods always belong to a data type, they have a concept of
self that functions do not.
source: https://www.hackingwithswift.com/example-code/language/whats-the-difference-between-a-function-and-a-method
Lots of great answers, but let me use Xcode to show something visually from the UIKit module:
That is a function because it's written at the global level. It's not a method. Methods are scoped to a class.
Screenshot to show that it's at the global level.
The following function is at the global level:
public func UIApplicationMain(_ argc: Int32, _ argv: UnsafeMutablePointer<UnsafeMutablePointer<Int8>>!,
_ principalClassName: String?, _ delegateClassName: String?) -> Int32
Icons for the different symbols. (Class, Method, Property, Protocol, Function, Extensions are all different symbols)
The function has an icon like 𝓯
The method has an icon of M
functional principle as a part of functional language
function is a first-class type (first-class citizen) in Swift. Higher order functions
assign to a variable
pass as an argument
return
Function
Function is a block of code that is created for executing some task. Function consists of name, optional parameters(name, type), optional return type, body.
func name(parameterName1: Int, parameterName2: String) -> Bool {
//statements
return true
}
Function type - function’s parameter type + return type[Java about]. For example it is used as function's parameter
//Function type for the sample above
(Int, String) -> Bool
Method
Method - is a function which is associated with a type - class, structure, enum [About]:
Instance method - method which belongs to instance
MyClass().foo()
Type method - method which belongs to type itself. class or static is used[About]
MyClass.foo()
Closure
As official doc says that Closure in Swift has three next forms:
global function(with name, without capturing) - is a function that is declared in a global scope(out of class scope). Usually it is defined as a first level of .swift file and does not have a big memory foot print
nested function(with name, with capturing enclosing function variables) - function inside other function
closure expression(without name, with capturing enclosing context)
Closure(closure expression) - anonymous function - is a block of code(functionality). Closure is a type of function without name. Closure is a function in terms of Functional programming. It can support capturing concept(if it doesn't capture it is lambda). It is similar to block in Objective-C.
[Closure vs Lambda]
They can be used for:
non-escaping closure - sync operations - click events, sort...
escaping closure - async operations - e.g.completion handler - it is a callback/notification which is called when task is done
class ClassA {
var variable = "Hello"
func fooA() {
print(variable)
let b = ClassB() //1
b.fooB(completionHandler: { [weak self] (input) -> String? in //2 pass closure //3 capture list or any calls from closure to outher scope
guard let self = self else { return nil }
self.variable = "World" //capturing self.variable
return String(input)
})
}
}
class ClassB {
var myCompletionHandler: ((Int) -> String?)? = nil //5
func fooB(completionHandler: #escaping (Int) -> String?) { //4
self.myCompletionHandler = completionHandler //6
let result = completionHandler(7)
}
func fooB2(completionHandler: #escaping (Int) -> String?) { //if you re-pass function to #escaping function you must mark it by #escaping too
self.fooB(completionHandler: completionHandler)
}
}
func testClosure() {
ClassA().fooA()
}
(Int) -> String? //Function type
//Closure Expression
{ [weak self] (input) -> String? in
//logic
}
[non-escaping vs escaping closure]
[#autoclosure]
[Init/customize stored property by closure]
[JVM Memory model]