Is anybody able to save the autocreated testplan successfully with Xcode 16.3? I get a crash no matter what (different filenames, locations, machines, ...). Now created a template project: same thing. Xcode Version 16.3 (16E140) on macOS 15.5 (24F74) Known issue, or am I holding it wrong?

I am encountering an issue where code coverage data is not showing for my main app in Xcode when running tests for the iOS simulator. However, code coverage is being reported correctly for some modules. Enable Code Coverage Support: YES Xcode 16.2 macOS: 15.3.1 Macbook Pro M1 14-inch, 2021 Despite these configurations, Xcode fails to show code coverage for the main app. Can anyone suggest what might be causing this issue and how to ensure code coverage is correctly reported for the main app during simulator builds?

Hi all, I’ve run into a frustrating issue with the FamilyControls and DeviceActivityMonitor APIs. I’ve received official approval from Apple to use the com.apple.developer.family-controls entitlement (distribution), and I’ve added the entitlement to both my main app and the DeviceActivityMonitor extension. I’ve also ensured the correct App Group is configured for both targets. Everything works perfectly when I install the app on my own device as an internal TestFlight tester. App blocking works, the DeviceActivityMonitor extension runs as expected, and the apps selected by the user are correctly shielded. However, for external TestFlight testers, while they do receive the Screen Time permission prompt, and can select apps to block, nothing actually gets blocked. It appears that the DeviceActivityMonitor extension is not being triggered at all on their devices. I’ve verified the following: The entitlement is approved and visible in App Store Connect The build is approved for external testing Testers are running iOS 16+ Shielding logic works properly on internal tester devices Clean installs have been tested on external devices Has anyone gotten FamilyControls + DeviceActivityMonitor working successfully for external testers via TestFlight? If this is a known limitation or if there are any additional steps required to enable extension execution for external users, I’d really appreciate any clarification. Thanks in advance for your help.

I am running Appium tests on an iOS 18 simulator, and I am encountering an intermittent issue where the device screen gets locked unexpectedly during the tests. The Appium logs show no errors or unusual activity, and all commands appear to be executed successfully. However, upon reviewing the device logs, I see entries related to the lock event, but the exact cause remains unclear. SpringBoard: (SpringBoard) [com.apple.SpringBoard:Common] lockUIFromSource:Boot options:{ SBUILockOptionsLockAutomaticallyKey: 1, SBUILockOptionsForceLockKey: 1, SBUILockOptionsUseScreenOffModeKey: 0 } SpringBoard: (SpringBoard) [com.apple.SpringBoard:Common] -[SBTelephonyManager inCall] 0 SpringBoard: (SpringBoard) [com.apple.SpringBoard:Common] LockUI from source: Now locking Has anyone experienced similar behavior with Appium on iOS 18, or could there be a setting or configuration in the simulator that is causing this issue?

At the last place I worked it took roughly 5 minutes to do an application build. Which in turn made doing any sort of TDD or ever just regular Unit Tests extremely painful to do as the cycle time was simply too long. But that got me thinking. In recent versions of Xcode, Apple added Previews for SwiftUI Views that basically showed code changes to the View in real time. And Previews were made possible by extremely targeted compilation of the view in question. So... what if instead of a Preview pane in the Xcode IDE there was a Test pane the could be displayed such that Tests for a piece of code could be created and run almost immediately? Perhaps by adding a #Testing section to your code #Testing(MyService.self) // Define the entity to be tested. If you could drop the turnaround time AND provide a test playground for service level code that could speed development of such code greatly... and encourage interactive test development at the same time. What do you think?