Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

support latest IOS (10-11) and Watch OS (3-4) versions #20

Closed
spotlessicode opened this issue Sep 18, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

support latest IOS (10-11) and Watch OS (3-4) versions #20

spotlessicode opened this issue Sep 18, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@spotlessicode
Copy link

I have a lot of deprecations and warnings in SyncKit, could you update the library with the most common things? I have summarized them in a list instead of overwriting this git library.

A recent iOS version stats counter from Apple showing that there are only 11% devices which are still having iOS 9 (9%) or earlier (2%), and 89% of devices have IOS 10. I believe you should drop out support for those versions or if you want to support IOS 9, it should be better a version check, but don't use basically deprecated codes. Watch OS 4 will available at all Watch series, so it is simply not worth supporting older versions than WatchOS 3.0.

1. Nullability Issues in Obj-C - nonnul and nullable QSChangeManager.h file mostly
2. Deprecations:
suggestion:
if #available(iOS 9, *) {}
for:

  • CKOwnerDefaultName in QSCloudKitSynchronizer+CoreData.m - row 43
CK_EXTERN NSString * const CKCurrentUserDefaultName API_AVAILABLE(macos(10.12), ios(10.0), tvos(10.0), watchos(3.0));
CK_EXTERN NSString * const CKOwnerDefaultName API_DEPRECATED_WITH_REPLACEMENT("CKCurrentUserDefaultName", macos(10.10, 10.12), ios(8.0, 10.0), tvos(9.0, 10.0), watchos(3.0, 3.0));
  • CKFetchRecordChangesOperation in QSCloudKitSynchronizer.m - row 494 and 565
API_DEPRECATED_WITH_REPLACEMENT("CKFetchRecordZoneChangesOperation", macos(10.10, 10.12), ios(8.0, 10.0), tvos(9.0, 10.0), watchos(3.0, 3.0))

one more in QSManagedObjectContext.m

(void)performBlock:(void(^)())block
{
    [self performBlockAndWait:block];
}
Conflicting parameter types in implementation of 'performBlock:': 'void (^ _Nonnull __strong)(void)' vs 'void (^__strong _Nonnull)()'
@mentrena
Copy link
Owner

mentrena commented Dec 3, 2017

Thanks, I believe these issues have been addressed, but let me know if I missed anything.

@mentrena mentrena closed this as completed Dec 3, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants