“SwiftData inheritance relationship”

Great one EMC2732. So I think as Facebook and Apple have a relationship to include social accounts in the OS itself means they are able to have these adjustments and possibly when Facebook is installed the extension showing is switched to one bundled with the Facebook app. Although I could totally be wrong on that!I build an app that allows sharing to Facebook and we've recently had to adjust things on web and iOS to ensure we don't prefill any content to Facebook when sharing links etc.I think the suggestion to use the Facebook iOS SDK is simply just them wanting to provide the best experience and still won't allow you to prefill content, especially as they can quickly make adjustments to the SDK compared to that within iOS itself. The key thing they are after is having the user add their own copy to the message field with link/photo attachments. I haven't see the SDK provide anyway of prefilling a share sheet with text.Just some thoughts. I'm sure Apple have reviewed Facebook's app thoroughly.

Does setting the NSAppearance of the view to NSAppearanceNameAqua not work?By setting the Appearance of the container to VibrantDark, I believe that is inheritted by all subviews. Perhaps try setting the ImageWell's appearance to Aqua?

Q1. Which app gets the priority for filtering decisions?Q2. If one app allows website A but the other app disallows website A, how would OS decide?This is actually covered by the documentation, but you have to read between the lines a little. Specifically, the NEFilterManager Class Reference has this to say about the enabled property. Setting this property to true and saving the configuration will disable all other network content filters on the system …Thus, it’s not possible to have multiple filter providers active simultaneously, and thus the situations you described can’t crop up.Q3. If there are multiple apps implementing NETunnelProviderManager with default route, who will get the utun packets?This is also covered by the documentation, this time in the NETunnelProviderManager Class Reference.VPN configurations created using NETunnelProviderManager are classified as regular enterprise VPN configurations (as opposed to the Personal VPN configurations created by NEVPNManager). Only one enterprise VPN confi

we're experiencing the same thing. seems like it only affects devices that did not have the app installed prior to upgrade, or devices that were restored/upgraded.i'm guessing it is a trust issue...with devices that had previously trusted the developer, then upgraded, there was no problem launching the apps until i delete them and try to reinstall them. once the trust relationship is gone (via deleting the previously trusted apps) ...baam... problem replicated. Previously, the OS would normally would ask if you want to trust the developer when installing, but that step isn't happening anymore. this did not happen to me when i was testing our apps with iOS 9 beta.the plist bundle identifier is the same name as the app... so i doubt that is the issue. i'm not an ios developer, but i'm wondering if the apps need to be rebuilt specifically for fresh installs (outside the app store). i'm waiting for our developer to get back to me on that.

we're experiencing the same thing. seems like it only affects devices that did not have the app installed prior to upgrade, or devices that were restored/upgraded.i'm guessing it is a trust issue...with devices that had previously trusted the developer, then upgraded, there was no problem launching the apps until i delete them and try to reinstall them. once the trust relationship is gone (via deleting the previously trusted apps) ...baam... problem replicated. Previously, the OS would normally would ask if you want to trust the developer when installing, but that step isn't happening anymore. this did not happen to me when i was testing our apps with iOS 9 beta.the plist bundle identifier is the same name as the app... so i doubt that is the issue. i'm not an ios developer, but i'm wondering if the apps need to be rebuilt specifically for fresh installs (outside the app store). i'm waiting for our developer to get back to me on that. also submitted a ticket with apple...

Here's a similar but smaller example, this time I will show the code before the workaround is applied. This will make the compiler work at 100% cpu for a long time and eventually it will stop with an error msg saying that the expression is too complex to be solved in reasonable time:protocol StaticArrayType : CollectionType { typealias Item var startIndex: Int { get } var endIndex: Int { get } subscript (position: Int) -> Item { get } } extension StaticArrayType { var startIndex: Int { return 0 } } struct EmptyStaticArray<Item> : StaticArrayType { var endIndex: Int { return 0 } subscript (position: Int) -> Item { fatalError(Index out of bounds.) } } struct StaticArray<Tail: StaticArrayType> : StaticArrayType { var head: Tail.Item var tail: Tail var endIndex: Int { return tail.endIndex + 1 } subscript (position: Int) -> Tail.Item { return position == 0 ? head : tail[position - 1] } } infix operator ! { precedence 1 associativity right } func !<T>(lhs: T, rhs: T) -> StaticArray<

So the use of GCEventViewController is required?I've derived my view controller from GLKViewController.Is this unsupported for AppleTV, and should I switch to GCEventViewController instead?Or can I somehow do multiple inheritance?I'm on ObjC, btw.Thanks, Bram

Some conceptual things about your code:1.You are assuming that controllers[0] is always Remote controller, but it is possible that due power savings/battery/bt connection problems, the remote could be in a disconnected status, and in a future connection, it can take the 2nd position in the array. It is not guaranteed that it will be always the first element of controllers array. I'd suggest you to check the GCMicroGamepad profile of each controller before making any assignation.2. Think about this possible scenery: I'm a single player that have bought a gamepad to play my favorite title, because I don't like the Remote for playing. With that code, you are always tied in single player mode to play with the remote. You should revise your concept about the relationship between player and controller.3. IMHO, assigning callback blocks for each button should be done in a few, very specific cases (only with single player games), because you are losing the reference of the controller. You should setup some i

Yes, the problem is that this is already part of a class hierarchy. I wanted to add some specialised behaviour in one of the base classes (based on the type of T) which would then be inherited by all subclasses.If I added a subclass instead (which only accepts T:B), I would basically be forking the class hierarchy, which isn't what I want.i.e. with specialised extensions:MyCollectionView<T>MyCollectionView<T:Sectionable> | VMyCollectionViewSubClass<T>MyCollectionViewSubClass<T:Sectionable>versus subclassing:MyCollectionView<T> -> MyCollectionViewSubClass<T> | VMySectionableCollectionView<T:Sectionable> -> MySectionableCollectionViewSubClass<T:Sectionable>