david.delagneau
dbc1894e27
- Introduced new maps for navigating project knowledge, including "Current Work," "Fidelity Domain," "Fidelity Apps," "Work Items," and "People." - Created base files for daily notes, decisions, people, systems, work items, and workstreams with defined properties and views. - Developed templates for daily notes, decisions, meeting notes, persons, systems, work items, and workstreams to standardize documentation. - Updated scripts and prompts to reflect the new project-knowledge directory structure. - Removed outdated onboarding and start-here documents, consolidating relevant information into the new maps. - Ensured all references in workflows and scripts point to the new project-knowledge paths.
95 lines
4.0 KiB
Markdown
95 lines
4.0 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: guidance
|
|
project: fidelity
|
|
status: active
|
|
updated: 2026-04-16
|
|
tags:
|
|
- ios
|
|
- fidelity
|
|
---
|
|
# Current iOS And Swift Practices
|
|
|
|
## Goal
|
|
|
|
Keep Swift/iOS answers modern without turning the workspace into stale API documentation.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Currentness Rule
|
|
|
|
For version-sensitive recommendations, verify against official sources before presenting as current best practice.
|
|
|
|
Prefer:
|
|
|
|
- Apple Developer Documentation
|
|
- Swift.org / docs.swift.org
|
|
- official WWDC materials when API behavior or migration guidance matters
|
|
|
|
Avoid relying only on memory for:
|
|
|
|
- newest SwiftUI APIs
|
|
- Observation / data-flow migration guidance
|
|
- Swift Testing availability or migration advice
|
|
- Swift concurrency behavior
|
|
- Xcode or iOS version-specific recommendations
|
|
- CocoaPods, podspec, private specs repo, trunk/CDN, or dependency-resolution behavior
|
|
- Swift Package Manager migration or package-resolution behavior
|
|
- CI/build tooling behavior that may depend on current toolchain versions
|
|
- claims that something is a "bad practice" when the answer depends on ecosystem status, migration cost, or project constraints
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Technical Verification Rule
|
|
|
|
For programming concepts tied to project decisions, the agent should behave like a senior engineer:
|
|
|
|
- distinguish stable engineering principles from ecosystem-specific guidance
|
|
- verify current tool behavior with primary documentation when the topic is version-sensitive
|
|
- separate general best practice from project-safe recommendation
|
|
- avoid blanket statements such as "CocoaPods is bad practice" without context
|
|
- explain tradeoffs: maintenance status, migration cost, consumer integration risk, release propagation, and validation path
|
|
- suggest workspace improvements when a recurring answer-quality gap appears
|
|
|
|
For Fidelity, dependency tooling is project-relevant because XFlowSDK, XFlowViewMaker, FTFrameworks, and Fid4 integration can depend on published versions, podspec repos, release propagation, and consumer validation.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Stable Defaults
|
|
|
|
- Prefer simple, testable Swift over clever abstractions.
|
|
- Prefer structured concurrency over ad-hoc callback or detached-task patterns when the deployment target and codebase support it.
|
|
- Keep UI state changes on the main actor.
|
|
- Avoid recommending new APIs until deployment target and project constraints are known.
|
|
- For SwiftUI, separate pure view composition from side effects and navigation/workflow coordination.
|
|
- For testing, use the framework already adopted by the codebase unless the user explicitly asks about migration.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Testing Guidance
|
|
|
|
- Apple positions Swift Testing as a modern option for unit tests in Xcode 16 and later.
|
|
- XCTest remains relevant, especially for UI tests, performance tests, and existing test suites.
|
|
- Do not recommend wholesale migration from XCTest unless the project constraints support it.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## SwiftUI Guidance
|
|
|
|
- Observation can be adopted incrementally; do not assume a project can immediately replace all `ObservableObject` usage.
|
|
- In SwiftUI code review, focus on data ownership, lifecycle, invalidation scope, navigation boundaries, and side effects.
|
|
- Avoid introducing `@StateObject`, `@ObservedObject`, `@State`, or `@Observable` recommendations without first identifying ownership and deployment constraints.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Source Anchors
|
|
|
|
- SwiftUI documentation: `https://developer.apple.com/documentation/swiftui`
|
|
- Observation migration: `https://developer.apple.com/documentation/swiftui/migrating-from-the-observable-object-protocol-to-the-observable-macro`
|
|
- Swift Testing: `https://developer.apple.com/documentation/testing`
|
|
- XCTest: `https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest`
|
|
- Swift language: `https://developer.apple.com/swift/`
|
|
- CocoaPods Build with CocoaPods: `https://guides.cocoapods.org/making/`
|
|
- CocoaPods Specs and Specs Repo: `https://guides.cocoapods.org/making/specs-and-specs-repo.html`
|
|
- CocoaPods Private Pods: `https://guides.cocoapods.org/making/private-cocoapods`
|
|
- CocoaPods trunk read-only plan: `https://blog.cocoapods.org/CocoaPods-Specs-Repo/`
|