Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
456 lines (371 sloc) 17.6 KB

Remove bridging conversion behavior from dynamic casts


Dynamic casts using as?, as!, and is are currently able to dynamically perform Cocoa bridging conversions, such as from String to NSString or from an ErrorProtocol-conforming type to NSError. This functionality should be removed to make dynamic cast behavior simpler, more efficient, and easier to understand. To replace this functionality, initializers should be added to bridged types, providing an interface for these conversions that's more consistent with the conventions of the standard library.

Swift-evolution thread: Reducing the bridging magic in dynamic casts


When we introduced Swift, we wanted to provide value types for common containers, with the safety and state isolation benefits they provide, while still working well with the reference-oriented world of Cocoa. To that end, we invested a lot of work into bridging between Swift's value semantics containers and their analogous Cocoa container classes. This bridging consisted of several pieces in the language, the compiler, and the runtime:

  • Importer bridging, importing Objective-C APIs that take and return NSString, NSArray, NSDictionary and NSSet so that they take and return Swift's analogous value types instead.

  • Originally, the language allowed implicit conversions in both directions between Swift value types and their analogous classes. We've been working on phasing the implicit conversions out--we removed the object-to-value implicit conversion in Swift 1.2, and propose to remove the other direction in SE-0072 --but the conversions can still be performed by an explicit coercion string as NSString. These required-explicit as coercions don't otherwise exist in the language, since as generally is used to force coercions that can also happen implicitly, and value-preserving conversions are more idiomatically performed by constructors in the standard library.

  • The runtime supports dynamic bridging casts. If you have a value that's dynamically of a Swift value type, and try to as?, as!, or is-cast it to its bridged Cocoa class type, the cast will succeed, and the runtime will apply the bridging conversion:

    // An Any that dynamically contains a value "foo": String
    let x: Any = "foo"
    // Cast succeeds and produces the bridged "foo": NSString
    let y = x as! NSString

Since Swift first came out, Cocoa has done a great job of "Swiftification", aided by new Objective-C features like nullability and lightweight generics that have greatly improved the up-front quality of importer-bridged APIs. This has let us deemphasize and gradually remove the special case implicit conversions from the language. I think it's time to consider extricating them from the dynamic type system as well, making it so that as?, as!, and is casts only concern themselves with typechecks, and transitioning to using standard initializers and methods for performing bridging conversions. The dynamic cast behavior has been a source of surprise for many users, and unfairly privileges bridged value types and classes with nonstandard behavior.

Proposed solution

I propose the following:

  • Dynamic casts as?, as! and is should no longer perform bridging conversions between value types and Cocoa classes.
  • Coercion syntax as should no longer be used to explicitly force certain bridging conversions.
  • To replace this functionality, we should add initializers to bridged value types and classes that perform the value-preserving bridging operations.


The Rules of as[?]

Our original goal implementing this behavior into the dynamic casting machinery was to preserve some transitivity identities between implicit conversions and casts that users could reason about, including:

  • x as! T as! U === x as! U, if x as! T succeeds. Casting to a type U should succeed and give the same result for any derived cast result.
  • x as! T as U === x as! U. If T is coercible to U, then you should get the same result by casting to T and coercing to U as by casting to U directly.
  • x as T as! U === x as! U. Likewise, coercing shouldn't affect the result of any ensuing dynamic casts.
  • x as T as U === x as U.

The interaction of these identities with the bridging conversions, as well as with other type system features like implicit nonoptional-to-Optional conversion, occasionally requires surprising behavior, for instance the behavior of nil Optional values. These rules also inform the otherwise-inconsistent use of as to perform explicit bridging conversions, when as normally only forces implicit conversions. By simplifying the scope of dynamic casts, it becomes easier to preserve these rules without bugs and unfortunate edge cases.

The Abilities of as? Today

In discussing how to change the behavior of dynamic casts, it's worth enumerating all the things dynamic casts are currently able to do:

  1. Check that an object is an instance of a specific class.

    class Base {}; class Derived: Base {}
    func isKindOfDerived(object: Base) -> Bool {
      return object is Derived
    isKindOfDerived(object: Derived()) // true
    isKindOfDerived(object: Base()) // false
  2. Check that an existential contains an instance of a type.

    protocol P {}
    extension Int: P {}
    extension Double: P {}
    func isKindOfInt(value: P) -> Bool {
      return value is Int
    isKindOfInt(value: 0) // true
    isKindOfInt(value: 0.0) // false
  3. Check that a generic value is also an instance of a different type.

    func is<T, U>(value: T, kindOf: U.Type) -> Bool {
      return value is U
    is(value: Derived(), kindOf: Derived.self) // true
    is(value: Derived(), kindOf: Base.self) // true
    is(value: Base(), kindOf: Derived.self) // false
    is(value: 0, kindOf: Int.self) // true
  4. Check whether the type of a value conforms to a protocol, and wrap it in an existential if so:

    protocol Fooable { func foo() }
    func fooIfYouCanFoo<T>(value: T) {
      if let fooable = value as? Fooable {
    extension Int: Fooable { func foo() { print("foo!") } }
    fooIfYouCanFoo(value: 1) // Prints "foo!"
    fooIfYouCanFoo(value: "bar") // No-op
  5. Check whether a value is _ObjectiveCBridgeable to a class, or conversely, that an object is _ObjectiveCBridgeable to a value type, and perform the bridging conversion if so:

    func getAsString<T>(value: T) -> String? {
      return value as? String
    func getAsNSString<T>(value: T) -> NSString? {
      return value as? NSString
    getAsString(value: "string") // produces "string": String
    getAsNSString(value: "string") // produces "string": NSString
    let ns = NSString("nsstring")
    getAsString(value: ns) // produces "nsstring": String
    getAsNSString(value: ns) // produces "nsstring": NSString
  6. Check whether a value conforms to ErrorProtocol, and bridge it to NSError if so:

    enum CommandmentError { case Killed, Stole, GravenImage, CovetedOx }
    func getAsNSError<T>(value: T) -> NSError? {
      return value as? NSError
    getAsNSError(CommandmentError.GravenImage) // produces bridged NSError

    This is what enables the use of catch let x as NSError pattern matching to catch Swift errors as NSError objects today.

  7. Check whether an NSError object has a domain and code matching a type conforming to _ObjectiveCBridgeableErrorProtocol, and extracting the Swift error if so:

    func getAsNSCocoaError(error: NSError) -> NSCocoaError? {
      return error as? NSCocoaError
    // Returns NSCocoaError.fileNoSuchFileError
    getAsNSCocoaError(error: NSError(domain: NSCocoaErrorDomain,
                                     code: NSFileNoSuchFileError,
                                     userInfo: []))
  8. Drill through Optionals. If an Optional contains some value, it is extracted, and the cast is attempted on the contained value; the cast fails if the source value is none and the result type is not optional:

    var x: String? = "optional string"
    getAsNSString(value: x) // produces "optional string": NSString
    x = nil
    getAsNSString(value: x) // fails

    If the result type is also Optional, a successful cast is wrapped as some value of the result Optional type. nil source values succeed and become nil values of the result Optional type:

    func getAsOptionalNSString<T>(value: T) -> NSString?? {
      return value as? NSString?
    var x: String? = "optional string"
    getAsOptionalNSString(value: x) // produces "optional string": NSString?
    x = nil
    getAsOptionalNSString(value: x) // produces nil: NSString?
  9. Perform covariant container element checks and conversions for Array, Dictionary, and Set.

There are roughly three categories of functionality intertwined here. (1) through (4) are straightforward dynamic type checks. ([4] is arguably a bit different from [1] through [3] in that protocol conformances are extrinsic to a type, whereas [1] through [3] check only the intrinsic type of the participating value.) (5) through (7) involve Cocoa bridging conversions. (8) and (9) reflect additional implicit conversions supported by the language at compile time into the runtime type system.

Detailed Design

Changes to dynamic cast behavior

Within the scope of this proposal, I'd like to propose removing behaviors (5) through (7) from dynamic casting:

  • (5) Dynamic casts will no longer check for _ObjectiveCBridgeable conformance in their source or destination types. "string" as Any as? NSString would fail.
  • (6) Types that conform to ErrorProtocol will no longer dynamically cast to NSError.
  • (7) NSError instances will no longer dynamically cast to ErrorProtocol- conforming types.

Eliminating explicit as coercions

With the bridging behavior removed from dynamic casting, we no longer have the transitivity justification for the special case behavior of as forcing bridging conversions, as in nsstring as String. This functionality should be removed, leaving as with only its core behavior of acting as a type annotation to force implicit conversions.

Replacement API for bridging conversions

To replace the removed language functionality, we should provide library APIs that follow the conventions set by the standard library. Bridging conversions are value-preserving, and the standard library uses unlabeled init(_:) initializers for value-preserving conversions. For nongeneric unconditionally- bridgeable types, such as String and NSString, this is straightforward (assuming we gain the ability to define factory initializers in Swift at some point):

extension String {
  init(_ ns: NSString) {
    self = ._unconditionallyBridgeFromObjectiveC(ns)

extension NSString {
  // Without a first-class factory init feature, this can be simulated with
  // a protocol extension
  factory init(_ string: String) {
    self = string._bridgeToObjectiveC()

As an implementation detail, we could add a refinement of _ObjectiveCBridgeable for unconditionally-bridgeable types and implement these initializer pairs as protocol extensions. Similarly, we can provide NSError with a factory initializer in the Foundation overlay to handle bridging from ErrorProtocol:

extension NSError {
  factory init(_ error: ErrorProtocol) {
    self = _bridgeErrorProtocolToNSError(error)

and the inverse bridging of NSErrors to special ErrorProtocol types can be handled by modifying the internal _ObjectiveCBridgeableErrorProtocol to require an unlabeled failable initializer:

public protocol _ObjectiveCBridgeableErrorProtocol : ErrorProtocol {
  /// Produce a value of the error type corresponding to the given NSError,
  /// or return nil if it cannot be bridged.
  init?(_ bridgedNSError: NSError)

For bridged generic containers like Array, Dictionary, and Set, the bridging conversions have to be failable, since not every element type is bridgeable, and the Objective-C classes come into Swift as untyped containers. (That may change if we're able to extend the Objective-C generics importer support from SE-0057 to apply to Cocoa container classes, though bridging support makes that challenging.)

extension Array {
  init?(_ ns: NSArray) {
    var result: Array? = nil
    if Array._conditionallyBridgeFromObjectiveC(ns, &result) {
      self = result!
    return nil

extension NSArray {
  init?<T>(_ array: Array<T>) {
    if !Array<T>.isBridgedToObjectiveC() {
      return nil
    return array._bridgeToObjectiveC()

Containers also support special force-bridging behavior, where the elements of the bridged value container are lazily type-checked and trap on access if there's a type mismatch. This can still be exposed via a separate labeled initializer:

extension Array {
  init(forcedLazyBridging object: NSArray) {
    var result: Array? = nil
    Array._forceBridgeFromObjectiveC(object, &result)
    self = result!

This seems to me like another improvement over our current behavior, where object as! Array<T> does lazy bridging whereas object as? Array<T> does eager bridging. This has been a common source of surprise, since in most other cases x as! T behaves equivalently to (x as? T)!. By changing to an interface defined within the language in terms of initializers, Array<T>(object)! performs eager bridging as one would normally expect, and Array<T>(forcedLazyBridging: object) explicitly asks for the lazy bridging.

There are common use cases that deserve consideration beyond simple back-and- forth conversion. In Cocoa code, it's common to work with heterogeneous containers of objects, which will come into Swift as [AnyObject] or [NSObject: AnyObject]. To extract typed data from these containers, it's useful to convert from AnyObject to a bridged value type in one step, like you can do with object as? String today. We can provide a failable initializer for this purpose:

extension _ObjectiveCBridgeable {
  init?(bridging object: AnyObject) {
    if let bridgeObject = object as? _ObjectiveCType {
      var result: Self? = nil
      if Self._conditionallyBridgeFromObjectiveC(bridgeObject, &result) {
        self = result!
    return nil

Dynamic cast bridging of NSError is commonly used in the catch _ as NSError formulation, to catch an arbitrary Swift error and handle it as an NSError. This is done frequently because ErrorProtocol by itself provides no public API for presenting errors. The need to explicitly bridge to NSError could be avoided in most cases by extending ErrorProtocol to directly support NSError's core API in the Foundation overlay:

extension ErrorProtocol {
  var domain: String { return NSError(self).domain }
  var code: Int { return NSError(self).code }
  var userInfo: [NSObject: AnyObject] { return NSError(self).userInfo }

Impact on existing code

Since dynamic behavior is involved, these changes cannot be automatically migrated with full fidelity. For example, if a value of type Any or generic T being cast to String or NSString, it's impossible for the compiler to know whether the cast is being made with the intent of inducing the bridging conversion. However, at least some cases can be recognized by the compiler and migrated. For example, any cast from a value that's statically of a value type to a class would now always fail, as would a cast from an object to a value type, so these cases can be warned about and fixits to use the new initializers can be offered. We can also recognize code that uses the catch <pattern> as NSError idiom and migrate away the as NSError cast if we make it unnecessary by extending ErrorProtocol.

Alternatives considered

Removing special-case Optional and container handling from dynamic casts

As discussed above, in addition to dynamic type checks and bridging conversions, dynamic casting also has special-case behavior for (8) drilling through Optionals and (9) performing covariant Array, Dictionary, and Set conversions. This dynamic behavior matches the special implicit conversions supported statically in the language, but has also been a source of complexity and confusion. We could consider separating this functionality out of the runtime dynamic casting machinery too, but we should do so in tandem with discussions of removing or tightening the corresponding implicit conversion behavior for optionals and covariant containers as well.

Replacing dynamic cast syntax with normal functions or methods

If one wanted to get really reductionist, they could ask whether as? and related operations really need special syntax at all; they could in theory be fully expressed as global functions, or as extension methods on Any/AnyObject if we allowed such things.