Swift Concurrency Resources: Forums tags: Concurrency The Swift Programming Language > Concurrency documentation Migrating to Swift 6 documentation WWDC 2022 Session 110351 Eliminate data races using Swift Concurrency — This ‘sailing on the sea of concurrency’ talk is a great introduction to the fundamentals. WWDC 2021 Session 10134 Explore structured concurrency in Swift — The table that starts rolling out at around 25:45 is really helpful. Swift Async Algorithms package Swift Concurrency Proposal Index DevForum post Why is flow control important? forums post Dispatch Resources: Forums tags: Dispatch Dispatch documentation — Note that the Swift API and C API, while generally aligned, are different in many details. Make sure you select the right language at the top of the page. Dispatch man pages — While the standard Dispatch documentation is good, you can still find some great tidbits in the man pages. See Reading UNIX Manual Pages. Start by reading dispatch in section 3. WWDC 2015 Session 718 Building Responsive and Efficient Apps with GCD [1] WWDC 2017 Session 706 Modernizing Grand Central Dispatch Usage [1] Avoid Dispatch Global Concurrent Queues forums post Waiting for an Async Result in a Synchronous Function forums post Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" [1] These videos may or may not be available from Apple. If not, the URL should help you locate other sources of this info.

I have an older project that was created before Xcode 26.2. In Xcode versions prior to 26.2, there was no Swift Compiler – Concurrency build setting. With those older versions, the following behavior occurs: a nonisolated function executes off the main thread. class ViewController: UIViewController { override func viewDidLoad() { super.viewDidLoad() run() } private func run() { Task { await runInMainThread() } } func runInMainThread() async { print(">>>> IN runInMainThread(), Thread.isMainThread \(Thread.isMainThread)") await runInBackgroundThread() } private nonisolated func runInBackgroundThread() async { print(">>>> IN runInBackgroundThread(), Thread.isMainThread \(Thread.isMainThread)") } } Output: >>>> IN runInMainThread(), Thread.isMainThread true >>>> IN runInBackgroundThread(), Thread.isMainThread false However, starting with Xcode 26.2, Apple introduced the Swift Compiler – Concurrency settings. When running the same code with the default configuration: Approachable Concurrency = Yes Default Actor Isolation = MainActor This is the output Output: >>>> IN runInMainThread(), Thread.isMainThread true >>>> IN runInBackgroundThread(), Thread.isMainThread true the nonisolated function now executes on the main thread. This raises the following questions: What is the correct Swift Compiler – Concurrency configuration if I want a nonisolated function to run off the main thread? Is nonisolated still an appropriate way to ensure code runs on a background thread?

Swift concurrency is an important part of my day-to-day job. I created the following document for an internal presentation, and I figured that it might be helpful for others. If you have questions or comments, put them in a new thread here on DevForums. Use the App & System Services > Processes & Concurrency topic area and tag it with both Swift and Concurrency. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Swift Concurrency Proposal Index This post summarises the Swift Evolution proposals that went into the Swift concurrency design. It covers the proposal that are implemented in Swift 6.2, plus a few additional ones that aren’t currently available. The focus is here is the Swift Evolution proposals. For general information about Swift concurrency, see the documentation referenced by Concurrency Resources. Swift 6.0 The following Swift Evolution proposals form the basis of the Swift 6.0 concurrency design. SE-0176 Enforce Exclusive Access to Memory link: SE-0176 notes: This defines the “Law of Exclusivity”, a critical foundation for both serial and concurrent code. SE-0282 Clarify the Swift memory consistency model ⚛︎ link: SE-0282 notes: This defines Swift’s memory model, that is, the rules about what is and isn’t allowed when it comes to concurrent memory access. SE-0296 Async/await link: SE-0296 introduces: async functions, async, await SE-0297 Concurrency Interoperability with Objective-C link: SE-0297 notes: Specifies how Swift imports an Objective-C method with a completion handler as an async method. Explicitly allows @objc actors. SE-0298 Async/Await: Sequences link: SE-0298 introduces: AsyncSequence, for await syntax notes: This just defines the AsyncSequence protocol. For one concrete implementation of that protocol, see SE-0314. SE-0300 Continuations for interfacing async tasks with synchronous code link: SE-0300 introduces: CheckedContinuation, UnsafeContinuation notes: Use these to create an async function that wraps a legacy request-reply concurrency construct. SE-0302 Sendable and @Sendable closures link: SE-0302 introduces: Sendable, @Sendable closures, marker protocols SE-0304 Structured concurrency link: SE-0304, third-party commentary introduces: unstructured and structured concurrency, Task, cancellation, CancellationError, withTaskCancellationHandler(…), sleep(…), withTaskGroup(…), withThrowingTaskGroup(…) notes: For the async let syntax, see SE-0317. For more ways to sleep, see SE-0329 and SE-0374. For discarding task groups, see SE-0381. SE-0306 Actors link: SE-0306 introduces: actor syntax notes: For actor-isolated parameters and the nonisolated keyword, see SE-0313. For global actors, see SE-0316. For custom executors and the Actor protocol, see SE-0392. SE-0311 Task Local Values link: SE-0311 introduces: TaskLocal SE-0313 Improved control over actor isolation link: SE-0313 introduces: isolated parameters, nonisolated SE-0314 AsyncStream and AsyncThrowingStream link: SE-0314 introduces: AsyncStream, AsyncThrowingStream, onTermination notes: These are super helpful when you need to publish a legacy notification construct as an async stream. For a simpler API to create a stream, see SE-0388. SE-0316 Global actors link: SE-0316 introduces: GlobalActor, MainActor notes: This includes the @MainActor syntax for closures. SE-0317 async let bindings link: SE-0317 introduces: async let syntax SE-0323 Asynchronous Main Semantics link: SE-0323 SE-0327 On Actors and Initialization link: SE-0327 notes: For a proposal to allow access to non-sendable isolated state in a deinitialiser, see SE-0371. SE-0329 Clock, Instant, and Duration link: SE-0329 introduces: Clock, InstantProtocol, DurationProtocol, Duration, ContinuousClock, SuspendingClock notes: For another way to sleep, see SE-0374. SE-0331 Remove Sendable conformance from unsafe pointer types link: SE-0331 SE-0337 Incremental migration to concurrency checking link: SE-0337 introduces: @preconcurrency, explicit unavailability of Sendable notes: This introduces @preconcurrency on declarations, on imports, and on Sendable protocols. For @preconcurrency conformances, see SE-0423. SE-0338 Clarify the Execution of Non-Actor-Isolated Async Functions link: SE-0338 note: This change has caught a bunch of folks by surprise and there’s a discussion underway as to whether to adjust it. SE-0340 Unavailable From Async Attribute link: SE-0340 introduces: noasync availability kind SE-0343 Concurrency in Top-level Code link: SE-0343 notes: For how strict concurrency applies to global variables, see SE-0412. SE-0374 Add sleep(for:) to Clock link: SE-0374 notes: This builds on SE-0329. SE-0381 DiscardingTaskGroups link: SE-0381 introduces: DiscardingTaskGroup, ThrowingDiscardingTaskGroup notes: Use this for task groups that can run indefinitely, for example, a network server. SE-0388 Convenience Async[Throwing]Stream.makeStream methods link: SE-0388 notes: This builds on SE-0314. SE-0392 Custom Actor Executors link: SE-0392 introduces: Actor protocol, Executor, SerialExecutor, ExecutorJob, assumeIsolated(…) notes: For task executors, a closely related concept, see SE-0417. For custom isolation checking, see SE-0424. SE-0395 Observation link: SE-0395 introduces: Observation module, Observable notes: While this isn’t directly related to concurrency, it’s relationship to Combine, which is an important exising concurrency construct, means I’ve included it in this list. SE-0401 Remove Actor Isolation Inference caused by Property Wrappers link: SE-0401, third-party commentary availability: upcoming feature flag: DisableOutwardActorInference SE-0410 Low-Level Atomic Operations ⚛︎ link: SE-0410 introduces: Synchronization module, Atomic, AtomicLazyReference, WordPair SE-0411 Isolated default value expressions link: SE-0411, third-party commentary SE-0412 Strict concurrency for global variables link: SE-0412 introduces: nonisolated(unsafe) notes: While this is a proposal about globals, the introduction of nonisolated(unsafe) applies to “any form of storage”. SE-0414 Region based Isolation link: SE-0414, third-party commentary notes: To send parameters and results across isolation regions, see SE-0430. SE-0417 Task Executor Preference link: SE-0417, third-party commentary introduces: withTaskExecutorPreference(…), TaskExecutor, globalConcurrentExecutor notes: This is closely related to the custom actor executors defined in SE-0392. SE-0418 Inferring Sendable for methods and key path literals link: SE-0418, third-party commentary availability: upcoming feature flag: InferSendableFromCaptures notes: The methods part of this is for “partial and unapplied methods”. SE-0420 Inheritance of actor isolation link: SE-0420, third-party commentary introduces: #isolation, optional isolated parameters notes: This is what makes it possible to iterate over an async stream in an isolated async function. SE-0421 Generalize effect polymorphism for AsyncSequence and AsyncIteratorProtocol link: SE-0421, third-party commentary notes: Previously AsyncSequence used an experimental mechanism to support throwing and non-throwing sequences. This moves it off that. Instead, it uses an extra Failure generic parameter and typed throws to achieve the same result. This allows it to finally support a primary associated type. Yay! SE-0423 Dynamic actor isolation enforcement from non-strict-concurrency contexts link: SE-0423, third-party commentary introduces: @preconcurrency conformance notes: This adds a number of dynamic actor isolation checks (think assumeIsolated(…)) to close strict concurrency holes that arise when you interact with legacy code. SE-0424 Custom isolation checking for SerialExecutor link: SE-0424, third-party commentary introduces: checkIsolation() notes: This extends the custom actor executors introduced in SE-0392 to support isolation checking. SE-0430 sending parameter and result values link: SE-0430, third-party commentary introduces: sending notes: Adds the ability to send parameters and results between the isolation regions introduced by SE-0414. SE-0431 @isolated(any) Function Types link: SE-0431, third-party commentary, third-party commentary introduces: @isolated(any) attribute on function types, isolation property of functions values notes: This is laying the groundwork for SE-NNNN Closure isolation control. That, in turn, aims to bring the currently experimental @_inheritActorContext attribute into the language officially. SE-0433 Synchronous Mutual Exclusion Lock 🔒 link: SE-0433 introduces: Mutex SE-0434 Usability of global-actor-isolated types link: SE-0434, third-party commentary availability: upcoming feature flag: GlobalActorIsolatedTypesUsability notes: This loosen strict concurrency checking in a number of subtle ways. Swift 6.1 Swift 6.1 has the following additions. Vision: Improving the approachability of data-race safety link: vision SE-0442 Allow TaskGroup’s ChildTaskResult Type To Be Inferred link: SE-0442, third-party commentary notes: This represents a small quality of life improvement for withTaskGroup(…) and withThrowingTaskGroup(…). SE-0449 Allow nonisolated to prevent global actor inference link: SE-0449, third-party commentary notes: This is a straightforward extension to the number of places you can apply nonisolated. Swift 6.2 Xcode 26 beta has two new build settings: Approachable Concurrency enables the following feature flags: DisableOutwardActorInference, GlobalActorIsolatedTypesUsability, InferIsolatedConformances, InferSendableFromCaptures, and NonisolatedNonsendingByDefault. Default Actor Isolation controls SE-0466 Swift 6.2, still in beta, has the following additions. SE-0371 Isolated synchronous deinit link: SE-0371, third-party commentary introduces: isolated deinit notes: Allows a deinitialiser to access non-sendable isolated state, lifting a restriction imposed by SE-0327. SE-0457 Expose attosecond representation of Duration link: SE-0457 introduces: attoseconds, init(attoseconds:) SE-0461 Run nonisolated async functions on the caller’s actor by default link: SE-0461 availability: upcoming feature flag: NonisolatedNonsendingByDefault introduces: nonisolated(nonsending), @concurrent notes: This represents a significant change to how Swift handles actor isolation by default, and introduces syntax to override that default. SE-0462 Task Priority Escalation APIs link: SE-0462 introduces: withTaskPriorityEscalationHandler(…) notes: Code that uses structured concurrency benefits from priority boosts automatically. This proposal exposes APIs so that code using unstructured concurrency can do the same. SE-0463 Import Objective-C completion handler parameters as @Sendable link: SE-0463 notes: This is a welcome resolution to a source of much confusion. SE-0466 Control default actor isolation inference link: SE-0466, third-party commentary availability: not officially approved, but a de facto part of Swift 6.2 introduces: -default-isolation compiler flag notes: This is a major component of the above-mentioned vision document. SE-0468 Hashable conformance for Async(Throwing)Stream.Continuation link: SE-0468 notes: This is an obvious benefit when you’re juggling a bunch of different async streams. SE-0469 Task Naming link: SE-0469 introduces: name, init(name:…) SE-0470 Global-actor isolated conformances link: SE-0470 availability: upcoming feature flag: InferIsolatedConformances introduces: @SomeActor protocol conformance notes: This is particularly useful when you want to conform an @MainActor type to Equatable, Hashable, and so on. SE-0471 Improved Custom SerialExecutor isolation checking for Concurrency Runtime link: SE-0471 notes: This is a welcome extension to SE-0424. SE-0472 Starting tasks synchronously from caller context link: SE-0472 introduces: immediate[Detached](…), addImmediateTask[UnlessCancelled](…), notes: This introduces the concept of an immediate task, one that initially uses the calling execution context. This is one of those things where, when you need it, you really need it. But it’s hard to summary when you might need it, so you’ll just have to read the proposal (-: In Progress The proposals in this section didn’t make Swift 6.2. SE-0406 Backpressure support for AsyncStream link: SE-0406 availability: returned for revision notes: Currently AsyncStream has very limited buffering options. This was a proposal to improve that. This feature is still very much needed, but the outlook for this proposal is hazy. My best guess is that something like this will land first in the Swift Async Algorithms package. See this thread. SE-NNNN Closure isolation control link: SE-NNNN introduces: @inheritsIsolation availability: not yet approved notes: This aims to bring the currently experimental @_inheritActorContext attribute into the language officially. It’s not clear how this will play out given the changes in SE-0461. Revision History 2026-01-07 Added another third-party commentary links. 2025-09-02 Updated for the upcoming release Swift 6.2. 2025-04-07 Updated for the release of Swift 6.1, including a number of things that are still in progress. 2024-11-09 First post.

Hi everyone, I believe this should be a simple and expected default behavior in a real-world app, but I’m unable to make it work: I have a View (a screen/page in this case) that calls an endpoint using async/await. If the endpoint hasn’t finished, but I navigate forward to a DetailView, I want the endpoint to continue fetching data (i.e., inside the @StateObject ViewModel that the View owns). This way, when I go back, the View will have refreshed with the fetched data once it completes. If the endpoint hasn’t finished and I navigate back to the previous screen, I want it to be canceled, and the @StateObject ViewModel should be deinitialized. I can achieve 1 and 3 using the .task modifier, since it automatically cancels the asynchronous task when the view disappears: view .task { await vm.getData() } I can achieve 1 and 2 using a structured Task in the View (or in the ViewModel, its the same behavior), for example: .onFirstAppearOnly { Task { away vm.getData() } } onFirstAppearOnly is a custom modifier that I have for calling onAppear only once in view lifecycle. Just to clarify, I dont think that part is important for the purpose of the example My question is: How can I achieve all three behaviors? My minimum deployment target is iOS 15, and I’m using NavigationView + NavigationLink. However, I have also tried using NavigationStack + NavigationPath and still couldn’t get it to work. Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you!

Is the pseudocode below thread-safe? Imagine that the Main thread sets the CAMetalLayer's drawableSize to a new size meanwhile the rendering thread is in the middle of rendering into an existing MTLDrawable which does still have the old size. Is the change of metalLayer.drawableSize thread-safe in the sense that I can present an old MTLDrawable which has a different resolution than the current value of metalLayer.drawableSize? I assume that setting the drawableSize property informs Metal that the next MTLDrawable offered by the CAMetalLayer should have the new size, right? Is it valid to assume that "metalLayer.drawableSize = newSize" and "metalLayer.nextDrawable()" are internally synchronized, so it cannot happen that metalLayer.nextDrawable() would produce e.g. a MTLDrawable with the old width but with the new height (or a completely invalid resolution due to potential race conditions)? func onWindowResized(newSize: CGSize) { // Called on the Main thread metalLayer.drawableSize = newSize } func onVsync(drawable: MTLDrawable) { // Called on a background rendering thread renderer.renderInto(drawable: drawable) }

App intent has a perform method that is async and can throw an error, but I can't find a way to actually await the result and catch the error if needed. If I convert this working but non-waiting, non-catching code: Button("Go", intent: MyIntent()) to this (so I can control awaiting and error handling): Button("Go") { Task { do { try await MyIntent().perform() // 👈 } catch { print(error) } } } It crashes: AppDependency with key "foo" of type Bar.Type was not initialized prior to access. Dependency values can only be accessed inside of the intent perform flow and within types conforming to _SupportsAppDependencies unless the value of the dependency is manually set prior to access. Although it is invalid since the first version is working like a charm and dependencies are registered in the @main App init method and it is in the perform flow. So how can we await the result of the AppIntent and handle the errors if needed in the app? Should I re-invent the Dependency mechanism?

Hello, Regarding EKEventStore, the WWDC session mentions that “you should only have one of these for your application.” In my app, I need to use the instance on both the main thread and a background thread, and I would like to share a single instance across them. However, EKEventStore is a non-sendable type, so it cannot be shared across different isolation domains. I would like to know what the recommended best practice is for this situation. Also, do I need to protect the instance from data races by using a lock? Thank you.

I encountered a concurrency compilation warning when calling the TranslationSession.translations(from: [TranslationSession.Request]) API, and I'm don't know how to resolve it. I reviewed the official demo, but it appears identical.

Hi, I played around the last days with the new NetworkConnection API from Network framework that supports structured concurrency. I discovered a behavior, which is unexpected from my understanding. Let's say you have a dead endpoint or something that does not exist. Something where you receive a noSuchRecord error. When I then try to send data, I would expect that the send function throws an error but this does not happen. The function now suspends indefinitely which is well not a great behavior. Example simplified: func send() async { let connection = NetworkConnection(to: .hostPort(host: "apple.co.com", port: 8080)) { TCP() } do { try await connection.send("Hello World!".raw) } catch { print(error) } } I'm not sure if this is the intended behavior or how this should be handled. Thanks and best regards, Vinz

We're experiencing crashes in our production iOS app related to Apple's DeviceCheck framework. The crash occurs in DCAnalytics internal performance tracking, affecting some specific versions of iOS 18 (18.4.1, 18.5.0). Crash Signature CoreFoundation: -[__NSDictionaryM setObject:forKeyedSubscript:] + 460 DeviceCheck: -[DCAnalytics sendPerformanceForCategory:eventType:] + 236 Observed Patterns Scenario 1 - Token Generation: Crashed: com.appQueue EXC_BAD_ACCESS KERN_INVALID_ADDRESS 0x0000000000000010 DeviceCheck: -[DCDevice generateTokenWithCompletionHandler:] Thread: Background dispatch queue Scenario 2 - Support Check: Crashed: com.apple.main-thread EXC_BAD_ACCESS KERN_INVALID_ADDRESS 0x0000000000000008 DeviceCheck: -[DCDevice _isSupportedReturningError:] DeviceCheck: -[DCDevice isSupported] Thread: Main thread Root Cause Analysis The DCAnalytics component within DeviceCheck attempts to insert a nil value into an NSMutableDictionary when recording performance metrics, indicating missing nil validation before dictionary operations. Reproduction Context Crashes occur during standard DeviceCheck API usage: Calling DCDevice.isSupported property Calling DCDevice.generateToken(completionHandler:) (triggered by Firebase App Check SDK) Both operations invoke internal analytics that fail with nil insertion attempts. Concurrency Considerations We've implemented sequential access guards around DeviceCheck token generation to prevent race conditions, yet crashes persist. This suggests the issue likely originates within the DeviceCheck framework's internal implementation rather than concurrent access from our application code. Note: Scenario 2 occurs through Firebase SDK's App Check integration, which internally uses DeviceCheck for attestation. Request Can Apple engineering confirm if this is a known issue with DeviceCheck's analytics subsystem? Is there a recommended workaround to disable DCAnalytics or ensure thread-safe DeviceCheck API usage? Any guidance on preventing these crashes would be appreciated.

I have been working on an app for the past few months, and one issue that I have encountered a few times is an error where quick subsequent deletions cause issues with detached tasks that are triggered from some user actions. Inside a Task.detached, I am building an isolated model context, querying for LineItems, then iterating over those items. The crash happens when accessing a Transaction property through a relationship. var byTransactionId: [UUID: [LineItem]] { return Dictionary(grouping: self) { item in item.transaction?.id ?? UUID() } } In this case, the transaction has been deleted, but the relationship existed when the fetch occurred, so the transaction value is non-nil. The crash occurs when accessing the id. This is the error. SwiftData/BackingData.swift:1035: Fatal error: This model instance was invalidated because its backing data could no longer be found the store. PersistentIdentifier(id: SwiftData.PersistentIdentifier.ID(backing: SwiftData.PersistentIdentifier.PersistentIdentifierBacking.managedObjectID(0xb43fea2c4bc3b3f5 <x-coredata://A9EFB8E3-CB47-48B2-A7C4-6EEA25D27E2E/Transaction/p1756>))) I see other posts about this error and am exploring some suggestions, but if anyone has any thoughts, they would be appreciated.

I occasionally get this error in Xcode’s console: Potential Structural Swift Concurrency Issue: unsafeForcedSync called from Swift Concurrent context. What does this mean, and how can I resolve it? Googling it doesn’t turn up any results. This doesn't crash the app - it’s just an error diagnostic that I see in the Xcode console. The app keeps running before and after the issue. Is there a way I can set a breakpoint to catch this where it happens?

I got several reports about our TestFlight app crashing unconditionally on 2 devices (iOS 18.1 and iOS 18.3.1) on app start with the following reason: Termination Reason: DYLD 4 Symbol missing Symbol not found: _$sScIsE4next7ElementQzSgyYa7FailureQzYKF (terminated at launch; ignore backtrace) The symbol in question demangles to (extension in Swift):Swift.AsyncIteratorProtocol.next() async throws(A.Failure) -> A.Element? Our deploy target is iOS 18.0, this symbol was introduced in Swift 6.0, we're using latest Xcode 16 now - everything should be working, but for some reason aren't. Since this symbol is quite rarely used directly, I was able to pinpoint the exact place in code related to it. Few days ago I added the following code to our app library (details omitted): public struct AsyncRecoveringStream<Base: AsyncSequence>: AsyncSequence { ... public struct AsyncIterator: AsyncIteratorProtocol { ... public mutating func next(isolation actor: isolated (any Actor)? = #isolation) async throws(Failure) -> Element? { ... } } } I tried to switch to Xcode 26 - it was still crashing on affected phone. Then I changed next(isolation:) to its older version, next(): public mutating func next() async throws(Failure) -> Element? And there crashes are gone. However, this change is a somewhat problematic, since I either have to lower Swift version of our library from 6 to 5 and we loose concurrency checks and typed throws or I'm loosing tests due to Swift compiler crash. Performance is also affected, but it's not that critical for our case. Why is this crash happening? How can I solve this problem or elegantly work around it? Thank you! 2025-10-09_17-13-31.7885_+0100-23e00e377f9d43422558d069818879042d4c5c2e.crash

Hi everyone, I’m trying to register fonts system-wide using CTFontManagerRegisterFontURLs with the .persistent scope. The fonts are delivered through Apple-Hosted Background Assets (since On-Demand Resources are deprecated). Process-level registration works perfectly, but persistent registration triggers a system “Install Fonts” prompt, and tapping Install causes the app to crash immediately. I’m wondering if anyone has successfully used Apple-Hosted Background Assets to provide persistent, system-wide installable fonts, or if this is a current OS limitation/bug. What I Expect Fonts delivered through Apple-Hosted Background Assets should be eligible for system-wide installation Tap “Install” should install fonts into Settings → Fonts just like app-bundled or ODR fonts App should not crash Why This Matters According to: WWDC 2019: Font Management and Text Scaling Developers can build font provider apps that install fonts system-wide, using bundled or On-Demand Resources. WWDC 2025: Discover Apple-Hosted Background Assets On-Demand Resources are deprecated, and AHBAs are the modern replacement. Therefore, persistent font installation via Apple-Hosted Background Assets appears to be the intended path moving forward. Question Is this a known limitation or bug in iOS? Should .persistent font installation work with Apple-Hosted Background Assets? Do we need additional entitlement, manifest configuration, or packaging rules? Any guidance or confirmation from Apple engineers would be greatly appreciated. Additional Info I submitted a Feedback including a minimal reproducible sample project: FB21109320

Hi everyone, I'm looking for the correct architectural guidance for my SwiftData implementation. In my Swift project, I have dedicated async functions for adding, editing, and deleting each of my four models. I created these functions specifically to run certain logic whenever these operations occur. Since these functions are asynchronous, I call them from the UI (e.g., from a button press) by wrapping them in a Task. I've gone through three different approaches and am now stuck. Approach 1: @MainActor Functions Initially, my functions were marked with @MainActor and worked on the main ModelContext. This worked perfectly until I added support for App Intents and Widgets, which caused the app to crash with data race errors. Approach 2: Passing ModelContext as a Parameter To solve the crashes, I decided to have each function receive a ModelContext as a parameter. My SwiftUI views passed the main context (which they get from @Environment(\.modelContext)), while the App Intents and Widgets created and passed in their own private context. However, this approach still caused the app to crash sometimes due to data race errors, especially during actions triggered from the main UI. Approach 3: Creating a New Context in Each Function I moved to a third approach where each function creates its own ModelContext to work on. This has successfully stopped all crashes. However, now the UI actions don't always react or update. For example, when an object is added, deleted, or edited, the change isn't reflected in the UI. I suspect this is because the main context (driving the UI) hasn't been updated yet, or because the async function hasn't finished its work. My Question I'm not sure what to do or what the correct logic should be. How should I structure my data operations to support the main UI, Widgets, and App Intents without causing crashes or UI update failures? Here is the relevant code using my third (and current) approach. I've shortened the helper functions for brevity. // MARK: - SwiftData Operations extension DatabaseManager { /// Creates a new assignment and saves it to the database. public func createAssignment( name: String, deadline: Date, notes: AttributedString, forCourseID courseID: UUID, /*...other params...*/ ) async throws -> AssignmentModel { do { let context = ModelContext(container) guard let course = findCourse(byID: courseID, in: context) else { throw DatabaseManagerError.itemNotFound } let newAssignment = AssignmentModel( name: name, deadline: deadline, notes: notes, course: course, /*...other properties...*/ ) context.insert(newAssignment) try context.save() // Schedule notifications and add to calendar _ = try? await scheduleReminder(for: newAssignment) newAssignment.calendarEventIDs = await CalendarManager.shared.addEventToCalendar(for: newAssignment) try context.save() await MainActor.run { WidgetCenter.shared.reloadTimelines(ofKind: "AppWidget") } return newAssignment } catch { throw DatabaseManagerError.saveFailed } } /// Finds a specific course by its ID in a given context. public func findCourse(byID id: UUID, in context: ModelContext) -> CourseModel? { let predicate = #Predicate<CourseModel> { $0.id == id } let fetchDescriptor = FetchDescriptor<CourseModel>(predicate: predicate) return try? context.fetch(fetchDescriptor).first } } // MARK: - Helper Functions (Implementations omitted for brevity) /// Schedules a local user notification for an event. func scheduleReminder(for assignment: AssignmentModel) async throws -> String { // ... Full implementation to create and schedule a UNNotificationRequest return UUID().uuidString } /// Creates a new event in the user's selected calendars. extension CalendarManager { func addEventToCalendar(for assignment: AssignmentModel) async -> [String] { // ... Full implementation to create and save an EKEvent return [UUID().uuidString] } } Thank you for your help.

Hello! We are in the progress of migrating a large Swift 5.10 legacy code base over to use Swift 6.0 with Strict Concurrency checking. We have already stumbled across a few weird edge cases where the "guaranteed" @MainActor isolation is violated (such as with @objc #selector methods used with NotificationCenter). However, we recently found a new scenario where our app crashes accessing main actor isolated state on a background thread, and it was surprising that the compiler couldn't warn us. Minimal reproducible example: class ViewController: UIViewController { var isolatedStateString = "Some main actor isolated state" override func viewDidLoad() { exampleMethod() } /// Note: A `@MainActor` isolated method in a `@MainActor` isolated class. func exampleMethod() { testAsyncMethod() { [weak self] in // !!! Crash !!! MainActor.assertIsolated() // This callback inherits @MainActor from the class definition, but it is called on a background thread. // It is an error to mutate main actor isolated state off the main thread... self?.isolatedStateString = "Let me mutate my isolated state" } } func testAsyncMethod(completionHandler: (@escaping () -> Void)) { let group = DispatchGroup() let queue = DispatchQueue.global() // The compiler is totally fine with calling this on a background thread. group.notify(queue: queue) { completionHandler() } // The below code at least gives us a compiler warning to add `@Sendable` to our closure argument, which is helpful. // DispatchQueue.global().async { // completionHandler() // } } } The problem: In the above code, the completionHandler implementation inherits main actor isolation from the UIViewController class. However, when we call exampleMethod(), we crash because the completionHandler is called on a background thread via the DispatchGroup.notify(queue:). If were to instead use DispatchQueue.global().async (snippet at the bottom of the sample), the compiler helpfully warns us that completionHandler must be Sendable. Unfortunately, DispatchGroup's notify gives us no such compiler warnings. Thus, we crash at runtime. So my questions are: Why can't the compiler warn us about a potential problem with DispatchGroup().notify(queue:) like it can with DispatchQueue.global().async? How can we address this problem in a holistic way in our app, as it's a very simple mistake to make (with very bad consequences) while we migrate off GCD? I'm sure the broader answer here is "don't mix GCD and Concurrency", but unfortunately that's a little unavoidable as we migrate our large legacy code base! 🙂

I have a visionOS app where I instantiate ARKitSession and various providers (HandTrackingProvider and WorldTrackingProvider) in my appModel. That way, I can pass these providers to a Task which runs a gRPC server for sending the data from these providers to a client. When the users enters the immersive space of the app, the ARKitSession will run the providers if they are not running already. I am now trying to implement the AccessoryTrackingProvider with the PSVR sense controllers but it does not fit with my current framework because the controllers may not be connected when the ARKitSession.run function is called. So I need to find a new place to start the session. My question is, if I already have a session which is running the hand and world tracking providers, can I start another session to run the accessory tracking? Should they all be running on the same session? Is there a way to stop the session and restart it when the controllers are connected? When I tried this, I get an error that says "It is not possible to re-run a stopped data provider (<ar_hand_tracking_provider_t: " but if I instantiate a new HandTrackingProvider, then the one that got passed to the gRPC task would no longer be the one running in the new session. Any advice on how best to manage the various providers and ARKit sessions would be greatly appreciated.

Since Xcode 26 our tests are crashing due to the Main Thread not being able to deallocate WKNavigationResponse. Following an example: import Foundation import WebKit final class WKNavigationResponeMock: WKNavigationResponse { private let urlResponse: URLResponse override var response: URLResponse { urlResponse } init(urlResponse: URLResponse) { self.urlResponse = urlResponse super.init() } convenience init(httpUrlResponse: HTTPURLResponse) { self.init(urlResponse: httpUrlResponse) } convenience init?(url: URL, statusCode: Int) { guard let httpURLResponse = HTTPURLResponse(url: url, statusCode: statusCode, httpVersion: nil, headerFields: nil) else { return nil } self.init(httpUrlResponse: httpURLResponse) } } import WebKit import XCTest final class ExampleTests: XCTestCase { @MainActor func testAllocAndDeallocWKNavigationResponse() { let expectedURL = URL(string: "https://galaxus.ch/")! let expectedStatusCode = 404 let instance = WKNavigationResponeMock() // here it should dealloc/deinit `instance` automatically } Here the call stack: Thread 0 Crashed:: Dispatch queue: com.apple.main-thread 0 CoreFoundation 0x101f3dd54 CFRetain.cold.1 + 16 1 CoreFoundation 0x101e14860 CFRetain + 104 2 WebKit 0x10864dd24 -[WKNavigationResponse dealloc] + 52

Hi, I am programming in C and would like to use Grand Central Dispatch for parallel computing (I mostly do physics based simulations). I remember there used to be example codes provided by Apple, but can't find those now. Instead I get the plain documentation. May anyone point me to the correct resources? It will be greatly appreciated. Thanks ☺.

Error: "Attrubute can only be applied to types not declarations" on line 2 : @unchecked @unchecked enum ReminderRow : Hashable, Sendable { case date case notes case time case title var imageName : String? { switch self { case .date: return "calendar.circle" case .notes: return "square.and.pencil" case .time: return "clock" default : return nil } } var image : UIImage? { guard let imageName else { return nil } let configuration = UIImage.SymbolConfiguration(textStyle: .headline) return UIImage(systemName: imageName, withConfiguration: configuration) } var textStyle : UIFont.TextStyle { switch self { case .title : return .headline default : return .subheadline } } }