RF-9688 - [refactor]: Remove ReactiveSwift from Workflow public interface #360

mjohnson12 · 2025-07-17T16:44:36Z

This is a breaking change to Workflow that removes ReactiveSwift from the public interface of Workflow and Workflow UI.
There are 3 changes:

In WorkflowHost rendering is now a read only property of the latest rendering.
In WorkflowHost renderingPublisher is a Combine publisher that publishes renderings. In searching the register code base there were very few places we were using a Signal/SignalProducer from the rendering property. The plan would be to change those consumers to use renderingPublisher and sink.
In WorkflowHost output has been renamed to outputPublisher. It is now a Combine Publisher that can be used to subscribe to Workflow output. Per Andrew's suggestion I added a new protocol WorkflowOutputPubisher that exposes the outputPublisher. The output property is used in a lot of places in register. To fix those places I added an extension on WorkflowOutputPubisher in WorkflowReactiveSwift that re-exposes output as a Signal. All the places that use output will just need to import WorkflowReactiveSwift and they will continue to work.
WorkflowHostingController in WorkflowUI now implements WorkflowOutputPublisher. Consumers using output will just need to import WorkflowReactiveSwift to continue to work.

Note: Even though this removes ReactiveSwift as a dependency from the Workflow and WorkflowUI targets the Workflow Package has to continue to have ReactiveSwift as a dependency since it's used by WorkflowReactiveSwift. But because register uses bazel if you import Workflow/WorkflowUI in your module it does not import (directly or transitively) ReactiveSwift.

Checklist

Unit Tests
UI Tests
Snapshot Tests (iOS only)
I have made corresponding changes to the documentation

WorkflowUIReactiveSwift/Sources/WorkflowHostingController+OutputSignal.swift

WorkflowUI/Sources/Hosting/WorkflowHostingController.swift

Workflow/Sources/WorkflowHost.swift

WorkflowReactiveSwift/Sources/WorkflowOutputPublisher+OutputSignal.swift

jamieQ · 2025-08-20T18:38:11Z

Workflow/Sources/WorkflowHost.swift

+public protocol WorkflowOutputPublisher {
+    associatedtype Output
+
+    var outputPublisher: AnyPublisher<Output, Never> { get }
+}


is this protocol necessary? what's the benefit over just extending the concrete type directly?

It allows us to add the output signal on both WorkflowHost and WorkflowHostingController by just extending the protocol in WorkflowReactiveSwift. This was a suggestion in Andrew's feedback.

ah gotcha (sorry i missed the existing convo). so the tradeoff here is adding a 'public' protocol to which we really only want 2 specific things to conform so that we don't need to make Workflow or WorkflowUI depend on ReactiveSwift – is that right? mostly out of curiosity – is it possible to define the protocol with package visibility? that seems like it might be a slightly more accurate definition (assuming it works and integrates successfully into the monorepo).

Before I had extensions on WorkflowHost and WorkflowHostingController which required a new module just to put the extension on WorkflowHostingController since I could not put it in WorkflowReactiveSwift since it does not know about WorkflowUI. Andrew's idea was use a protocol and drop the extension in WorkflowReactiveSwift so we don't need to have an additional module and the reactive swift stuff stays in WorkflowReactiveSwift.
I can look into the package visibility to see if that is possible.

If I make the protocol package visibility then the output property can't be public:
Property cannot be declared public because its type uses a package type

ah, makes sense – thanks for checking. maybe just as a matter of hygiene we should make the protocol underscored (_WorkflowOutputPublisher) and add comments regarding its purpose, since it doesn't seem like it's actually intended to be 'really' public.

Sounds good.

Pushed up the added underscore.

Workflow/Sources/WorkflowHost.swift

jamieQ · 2025-08-21T19:46:41Z

Workflow/Sources/WorkflowHost.swift

    let rootNode: WorkflowNode<WorkflowType>

-    private let mutableRendering: MutableProperty<WorkflowType.Rendering>
+    private let renderingSubject: CurrentValueSubject<WorkflowType.Rendering, Never>


slightly inclined to split the storage for the property vs the observer, since that will give us the most control over when the 'outside world' sees the update. e.g.

var rendering: Rendering let renderingSubject = PassThroughSubject<Rendering, Never>()

any thoughts on that? i guess one thing that would be different is that the old way (and presumably using a CVS) would have some baked-in synchronization mechanism over the underlying value. in theory this stuff should be main-thread-only though.

We currently are using a ReactiveSwift MutableProperty which does have an internal lock. Yes CurrentValueSubject does have some baked in serialization mechanism albeit without Apple documentation on what that is. Since we can't enforce someone reading the rendering value on the main thread I'm inclined to use the CurrentValueSubject since it's about as close as we can get as a Combine version of what we have now.
If we split the storage for the property out we could always lock around getting/setting it so I'm not against doing that but I think CurrentValueSubject should work for how we are using it.

jamieQ · 2025-08-21T21:54:56Z

WorkflowReactiveSwift/Sources/WorkflowOutputPublisher+OutputSignal.swift

+    public var output: Signal<Output, Never> {
+        Signal.unserialized { observer, lifetime in
+            let cancellable = outputPublisher.sink(
+                receiveCompletion: { completion in
+                    switch completion {
+                    case .finished:
+                        observer.sendCompleted()
+
+                    case .failure(let error):
+                        observer.send(error: error)
+                    }
+                },
+                receiveValue: { value in
+                    observer.send(value: value)
+                }
+            )
+            lifetime.observeEnded {
+                cancellable.cancel()
+            }
+        }


let's plan on testing this fairly thoroughly. i'm never certain what the exact lifetime semantics are for the ReactiveSwift stuff personally...

Agreed. This has been in use in the ReactiveSwift bridging module for a while.

jamieQ · 2025-08-22T14:18:03Z

Workflow/Sources/WorkflowHost.swift

+public protocol WorkflowOutputPublisher {
+    associatedtype Output
+
+    var outputPublisher: AnyPublisher<Output, Never> { get }
+}


ah gotcha (sorry i missed the existing convo). so the tradeoff here is adding a 'public' protocol to which we really only want 2 specific things to conform so that we don't need to make Workflow or WorkflowUI depend on ReactiveSwift – is that right? mostly out of curiosity – is it possible to define the protocol with package visibility? that seems like it might be a slightly more accurate definition (assuming it works and integrates successfully into the monorepo).

jamieQ · 2025-08-22T14:31:41Z

let's also include in the commit message something that clearly indicates this is a breaking change to the public API, a la the guidelines specified via 'conventional commits'

mjohnson12 · 2025-08-22T15:26:36Z

let's also include in the commit message something that clearly indicates this is a breaking change to the public API, a la the guidelines specified via 'conventional commits'

I've updated the commit message

robmaceachern · 2025-10-14T15:46:26Z

@mjohnson12 (PR cleanup) Does this need fresh reviews from folks, or should it be converted to a draft for now?

mjohnson12 · 2025-10-14T16:11:20Z

@mjohnson12 (PR cleanup) Does this need fresh reviews from folks, or should it be converted to a draft for now?

I need to rebase this to pickup Jamie's latest changes and then add some more tests but after the rebase I would like reviews on the changes

BREAKING CHANGE: This changes the public interface of WorkflowHost and WorkflowHostingController. The rendering property is now a read only property of the Rendering There is a new renderingPublisher property for a Combine publisher for renderings The output Signal property has been removed and moved to an extension in WorkflowReactiveSwift There is a new outputPublisher property for a Combine publisher for output

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch 8 times, most recently from bd84d2e to 13f4761 Compare July 17, 2025 18:11

watt reviewed Jul 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

WorkflowUIReactiveSwift/Sources/WorkflowHostingController+OutputSignal.swift Show resolved Hide resolved

mjohnson12 marked this pull request as ready for review July 31, 2025 14:19

mjohnson12 requested review from a team as code owners July 31, 2025 14:20

jamieQ reviewed Jul 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

WorkflowUI/Sources/Hosting/WorkflowHostingController.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

mjohnson12 changed the title ~~Remove ReactiveSwift from Workflow public interface~~ RF-9688 - Remove ReactiveSwift from Workflow public interface Jul 31, 2025

blevasseur-block reviewed Aug 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

Workflow/Sources/WorkflowHost.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

blevasseur-block reviewed Aug 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

WorkflowReactiveSwift/Sources/WorkflowOutputPublisher+OutputSignal.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch 2 times, most recently from f7e5fc3 to 59bcc8b Compare August 19, 2025 19:03

jamieQ reviewed Aug 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch from 96bbd04 to 7ce7d31 Compare August 21, 2025 14:16

jamieQ reviewed Aug 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch from 7ce7d31 to 99238f0 Compare August 22, 2025 15:25

mjohnson12 changed the title ~~RF-9688 - Remove ReactiveSwift from Workflow public interface~~ RF-9688 - [refactor]: Remove ReactiveSwift from Workflow public interface Aug 22, 2025

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch from 99238f0 to f9c40fd Compare August 25, 2025 17:01

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch from f9c40fd to 2fee5aa Compare September 11, 2025 16:46

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch from 2fee5aa to 101286a Compare September 30, 2025 14:34

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch from 101286a to 1ff4a45 Compare October 15, 2025 19:21

mjohnson12 force-pushed the markj/reactive_swift_removal branch from 1ff4a45 to d8f8562 Compare October 15, 2025 19:26

RF-9688 - [refactor]: Remove ReactiveSwift from Workflow public interface #360

Are you sure you want to change the base?

RF-9688 - [refactor]: Remove ReactiveSwift from Workflow public interface #360

Uh oh!

Conversation

mjohnson12 commented Jul 17, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Checklist

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jamieQ Aug 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mjohnson12 Aug 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jamieQ commented Aug 22, 2025

Uh oh!

mjohnson12 commented Aug 22, 2025

Uh oh!

robmaceachern commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

mjohnson12 commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

mjohnson12 commented Jul 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jamieQ Aug 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mjohnson12 Aug 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading