36 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
36 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
# XFlow SwiftUI Migration
|
|
|
|
## Goal
|
|
|
|
Track the durable behavior patterns introduced while moving XFlow from older assumptions toward a more complete SwiftUI implementation.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Stable Themes
|
|
|
|
- SwiftUI migration was not just a UI rewrite; it exposed contract, lifecycle, and parity gaps.
|
|
- Historical Slack evidence repeatedly referenced:
|
|
- component type expansion beyond simple string assumptions
|
|
- Next-button visibility rules driven by full service parameters
|
|
- markdown link handling and analytics integration
|
|
- navigation and modal behavior in pure SwiftUI environments
|
|
- dismissal delegate lifecycle sequencing
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## What Matters Now
|
|
|
|
- When a SwiftUI issue appears, check whether the missing behavior is:
|
|
- parity with UIKit behavior
|
|
- an incomplete service contract interpretation
|
|
- a lifecycle sequencing problem
|
|
- a consumer presentation constraint in Fid4
|
|
- Do not assume a visual issue is only cosmetic; several historical SwiftUI bugs changed flow behavior materially.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Historical Signals From Slack
|
|
|
|
- Jeff and Norman repeatedly refined story titles and descriptions around SwiftUI architecture changes, showing that scope wording mattered because the work was often deeper than the first symptom.
|
|
- Historical Slack context also shows that SwiftUI-specific work frequently required cross-team clarification when external dependencies or consumer environments behaved differently.
|