“SwiftData inheritance relationship”

I’d like to clarify your overall goal here. Are you planning to ship an app based on Chromium? Or are you building some sort of plug-in that you install within Chromium? This matters because… [quote='800879021, poluyanov, /thread/800879, /profile/poluyanov'] simply overwriting files in the app bundle [/quote] Right. That breaks the seal on the code signature, which causes problems for all privacy subsystems, which rely on the code signature to track the identity of your code, that is, to determine that version N+1 of your app is the ‘same code’ as version N. This is something we call out in TN3179 Understanding local network privacy: To ensure that local network privacy reliably tracks the identity of your macOS program, sign it with an Apple-issued code-signing identity. Most apps don’t suffer from this problem because, when Xcode rebuilds the app, it signs result. If you’ve selected an Apple-issued code-signing identity, the new app has the same designated requirement as the previous app, and thus the OS tr

@joadan but for self.project.subcategories?.removeAll { $0 == subcategory} you won't know if it didn't removeAll because subcategory didn't exist in the array, or if subcategories was nil to begin with because it didn't load from CloudKit / SwiftData.

This looks like a known issue related to SwiftData failing to materialize a relationship that has a super class. I’d suggest that you file a feedback report so you can use it to request the latest status of the issue. Best, —— Ziqiao Chen  Worldwide Developer Relations.

Found the issue: In a one to many relationship to be able to enter the one side of the relationship you need to identify the many side, even if you are not entering any values for the many side. In this case the many side is Contracts and a state variable needs to be declared @State private var contracts: [Contract] = [] with an empty array.

import SwiftData //Model for Earned Value Analysis The Model @Model final class CostReport{ var aCWP: Double //Actual Cost of Work Performed var bCWP: Double //Budgeted Cost of Work Performed var bCWS: Double // Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled var cumACWP: Double// Cumlative Actual Cost of Work Performed var cumBCWP: Double // Cumlative Budgeted Cost of Work Performed var cumBCWS: Double // Cumlative Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled var startDateOfPeriod: Date var endDateOfPeriod: Date var contract: Contract? init(aCWP: Double = 0.0, bCWP: Double = 0.0, bCWS: Double = 0.0, cumACWP: Double = 0.0, cumBCWP: Double = 0.0, cumBCWS: Double = 0.0, startDateOfPeriod: Date = .now, endDateOfPeriod: Date = .now, contract: Contract) { self.aCWP = aCWP self.bCWP = bCWP self.bCWS = bCWS self.cumACWP = cumACWP self.cumBCWP = cumBCWP self.cumBCWS = cumBCWS self.startDateOfPeriod = startDateOfPeriod self.endDateOfPeriod = endDateOfPeriod self.contract = contract } } @Model //Model for Contracts final class Contract{ v

I have noticed that launchd is changing my status to 78 at times which I vaguely remember is a permissions issue but I can't find the relevant documentation anymore. I'm not actually attempting to do anything even remotely privileged in the code yet; the example service is unchanged save for a liberal blanketing of print() calls to try and see if anything is ever running. Nothing ever shows up on the console so I have no clue what would lack permission to run if I'm getting SMAppService.Status.enabled back from the service object. Does the nested launchd job not inherit the parent app's entitlements or something?