socket.IO-objc
socket.IO-objc copied to clipboard
pkyeck
Using socket.IO-objc in a Swift application
I'm trying to rewrite an Obj-C app in Swift on iOS 8 and added a bridging header to import Socket.IO like so:
#import "SocketIO.h"
#import "SocketIOPacket.h"
When I build the app, I get the following error:
/Users/antoine/<ProjectName>/Pods/Headers/socket.IO/SocketIO.h:64: the current deployment target does not support automated __weak references
I'm not very well versed in compiler settings, so it may be a user error in setting up the project, although this project worked just fine before the move to Swift. Could it be an issue with socket.IO-objc itself?
~~I was able to resolve the error by commenting out SocketIO.h:64~~ Never mind, that breaks things.
Huh :)
Commenting that line for me at least makes SocketIO build, I'm no ARC expert, but I don't understand what the ivar declaration __weak id<SocketIODelegate> _delegate; brings that the property declaration doesn't already stipulate with @property (nonatomic, weak) id<SocketIODelegate> delegate;
Well, commenting out this line works for me, my app behaviour is unchanged, SocketIO behaves as expected.
Yeah I got it to work eventually also with that line commented out. I had my own issues that made me think I broke it. (I forgot to retain my SocketIO object, so I was surprised when I wasn't getting the delegate calls :smile:)
Yeah the delegate @property should make a _delegate ivar also, which is why I thought commenting out that line would would work (and it does).
On Jun 11, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Antoine Quint [email protected] wrote:
Well, commenting out this line works for me, my app behaviour is unchanged, SocketIO behaves as expected.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
I don't think that issue should be closed until the source works as-is. I'll send pull request, and hopefully someone who understands the issue will decide to pull it in or not.
While you're at it, try removing all of the other ivars that correspond with an @property. They shouldn't be needed, but I do not know what affect (if any) they have.
@NerdYouDontKnow I'd rather keep this change minimal for now, I don't feel confident enough to propose a larger change.