“SwiftData inheritance relationship”

## ContextI've a simple Core Data stack: `MainQueueMOC -> PrivateBackgroundMOC -> PersistentStoreCoordinator` that is managed by my `TTPersistenceManager` that looks like this:typedef NS_ENUM(NSInteger, TTPersistenceType) { TTPersistenceTypeInMemory, TTPersistenceTypeSQLite }; @interface TTPersistenceManager : NSObject @property (strong, nonatomic, readonly) NSManagedObjectContext *managedObjectContext; // this is the MainQueueMOC - (id)initWithPersistenceType:(TTPersistenceType)persistenceType; - (void)initializeCoreData; - (void)save; - (void)persist;Currently we only use the in memory store.It is inspired by this article from Marcus Zarra. So the MainQueueMOC is the single source of truth, and the PrivateBackgroundMOC is only used to save to the store in background, and it is never publicly exposed. If you read the article you'll notice that I added a method called `persist`, the difference between `save` and `persist` is:- `save`, saves the MainQueueMOC using `performBlockAndWait`- `persist`, saves

Can someone tell me why this is happening?I have converted an OS X app to use Storyboards. Some of my NSViewControllers have an associated NSWindowController. I created a 'window content' relationship from the Window Controller to the View Controller. I create a segue to the Window Controller. In prepareForSegue, I get the destination controller, which is the window controller, but I really want the contentViewController. However, the issue is that the contentViewController is nil. I want to do something like the following.NSWindowController *wc = [segue destinationController];MyViewController *mvc = (MyViewController *)wc.window.contentViewController;But looking at wc in the debugger, its contentViewController is nil.

In watchOS 1, I have access to my core data file and can load the database on the watch. This is great becasue it has all of the data I use in the app and I can update it from the watch and its automatically on the phone. In watchOS 2, I heard that this is not allowed now. My app is a TV Show tracker, and it seems hard to be able to make a watch app/glance/complication without access to my entire database. The main reason I would like to continue having access to my database is because of the relationships. I have to display the show data, and episode data and I need to know which episode belongs to which shows. It would seem like a pain to transfer over core data and have a separate smaller database on the watch. Also when a episode is marked as watched I need to check for the next episode to be able to make the relationship.What would be the best alternative or easiest way to provide the same functionalities on my watchOS 2 app from my watchOS 1 app? Should I just remove these functionalities and o

protocol Identifies : Hashable {} // Something is Identifiable if it has an Identifier protocol Identifiable : Hashable { typealias Identifier : Identifies var identifier : Identifier { get } } extension String : Identifies {} class Person : Identifiable { var identifier : String = avoid init for now } protocol Service { typealias Object : Identifiable func lookup (id : Object.Identifier) -> Object? } class PersonService <P:Person> : Service { // crashes here... func lookup(id: P.Identifier) -> P? { return nil } }The crash is avoidable withP:Person where P:IdentifiableWhy?Also, assume I want to avoid all type inferencing of the protocol typealiases. How would I modify the code to be as explicit as possible regarding type relationships?

I find this very surprising:protocol State { func enterState () func test () } extension State { func enterState () { print (State) } func test () { enterState () } } class State0: State { } class State1: State0 { func enterState () { print (State1) } } let x = State1 () x.enterState () // prints State1 x.test () // prints StateNotice that in that last line, in method 'test' an object of class State1 invokes State.enterState (), not self.enterState (). Is this intentional or a bug?The current documentation saysIf a conforming type provides its own implementation of a required method or property, that implementation will be used instead of the one provided by the extension.To my mind, 'State1' is a conforming type, and it does provide its own implementation of 'enterState', but that implementation isn't being used.

Hello, I was wondering if it was possible to create a swift based iOS control, say a UserInformation control, that would use a xib and inherit UIView or UIControl I want to use a xib to setup the constraints of the custom control, and ultimately be able to drop the control onto my main storyboard with @IBDesignable working. Every example I've seen created the custom control via code. I really didn't want to go through the pain of creating a control and constraints manually if I could do it with a xib. Let me know if this is possible in Swift.Thanks.

In the following code example, I get a does not conform to protocol on MyStruct.protocol OutsideProtocol { typealias T: InsideProtocol } protocol InsideProtocol { } protocol InheritingProtocol: InsideProtocol { } struct MyStruct: OutsideProtocol { typealias T = InheritingProtocol }This would compile if InheritingProtocol were a struct or class. Is this a known limitation and is there a workaround?