Fixed the invalidating heights animation #164

jay18001 · 2017-07-20T19:43:19Z

Closed #153

rubencagnie · 2017-07-20T20:15:06Z

Source/Cells/BrickCell.swift

@@ -218,6 +218,12 @@ open class BrickCell: BaseBrickCell {
        _brick.brickCellTapDelegate?.didTapBrickCell(self)
    }

+    open override func apply(_ layoutAttributes: UICollectionViewLayoutAttributes) {
+        UIView.animate(withDuration: UIView.inheritedAnimationDuration, animations: {


There shouldn't be a UIView.animate for every apply

rubencagnie · 2017-07-24T21:10:34Z

Example/BrickKit-Example.xcodeproj/xcshareddata/xcschemes/BrickApp-iOS.xcscheme

@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
      buildConfiguration = "Debug"
      selectedDebuggerIdentifier = "Xcode.DebuggerFoundation.Debugger.LLDB"
      selectedLauncherIdentifier = "Xcode.DebuggerFoundation.Launcher.LLDB"
+      language = ""


Is this needed?

I think this is an artifact from Xcode 9

rubencagnie · 2017-07-24T21:11:14Z

Example/Source/Examples/Interactive/InvalidateHeightViewController.swift

        }
+
+        let size = BrickSize(width: .ratio(ratio: 1), height: newHeight)
+        self.brickCollectionView.resizeBrick(with: BrickIdentifiers.titleLabel, newSize: size)


Can we wrap it in an animation block? That way it's a good documentation on how to animate this

I think the idea is that its already implicitly animated since it delegates to performUpdates function which also does this. wrapping it in an animation block doesn't have any effect if you just want the default animation parameters

Correct, there is a default animation, warping it in an animation block only changes the the duration.

I understand, but it would be good to demonstrate how to change the duration (and animation options)

Ok, no big deal

rubencagnie · 2017-07-24T21:12:02Z

Source/ViewControllers/BrickCollectionView.swift

@@ -234,7 +234,27 @@ open class BrickCollectionView: UICollectionView {
            self.collectionViewLayout.invalidateLayout(with: BrickLayoutInvalidationContext(type: .invalidate))
        }, completion: completion)
    }
-
+
+    open func resizeBrick(with identifier: String, newSize: BrickSize, completion: ((Bool) -> Void)? = nil)  {


Can we also supply an optional index as well?

rubencagnie · 2017-07-24T21:12:22Z

Source/ViewControllers/BrickCollectionView.swift

+                brick.size = newSize
+            }
+
+            self.collectionViewLayout.invalidateLayout(with: BrickLayoutInvalidationContext(type: .invalidate))


Why is this needed?

It's not, removing

rubencagnie · 2017-07-24T21:12:47Z

Source/ViewControllers/BrickCollectionView.swift

+
+    open func resizeBrick(with identifier: String, newSize: BrickSize, completion: ((Bool) -> Void)? = nil)  {
+        self.performBatchUpdates({
+            if let indexPath = self.indexPathsForBricksWithIdentifier(identifier).first {


We should hold a reference to the fetched indexPahts, so we can use them later. Also, why are we only doing first?

The index path may have changed after the invalidateLayout so we have to get it again

Why would the indexPaths have changed?

It would because we we calling invalidate layout but now since we don't that that's no longer an issue

klundberg · 2017-07-24T21:15:29Z

Source/Cells/BrickCell.swift

    open override func preferredLayoutAttributesFitting(_ layoutAttributes: UICollectionViewLayoutAttributes) -> UICollectionViewLayoutAttributes {
        guard self._brick.height.isEstimate(withValue: nil) else {
            return layoutAttributes
        }

-        let preferred = layoutAttributes.copy() as! UICollectionViewLayoutAttributes
+        let preferred = layoutAttributes


Should we revert this?

Doesn't seem to have any side effects by the looks of it

codecov-io · 2017-07-25T18:29:35Z

Codecov Report

Merging #164 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #164   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.42%   93.42%           
=======================================
  Files          39       39           
  Lines        4107     4107           
  Branches      333      332    -1     
=======================================
  Hits         3837     3837           
  Misses        269      269           
  Partials        1        1

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
Source/ViewControllers/BrickCollectionView.swift	`95.41% <ø> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
...rs/BrickCollectionView+BrickLayoutDataSource.swift	`100% <100%> (ø)`	⬆️
Source/Layout/BrickFlowLayout.swift	`91.37% <100%> (-0.09%)`	⬇️
Source/Cells/BrickCell.swift	`98.49% <100%> (+0.01%)`	⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update dab2eb3...0ac6344. Read the comment docs.

rubencagnie · 2017-07-27T01:17:38Z

Source/ViewControllers/BrickCollectionView.swift

+
+    open func resizeBrick(with identifier: String, index: Int? = nil, newSize: BrickSize, completion: ((Bool) -> Void)? = nil)  {
+        self.performBatchUpdates({
+            if let indexPath = self.indexPathsForBricksWithIdentifier(identifier, index: index).first,


Why are we only taking the first one? Should we just make index non-optional then?

rubencagnie · 2017-07-27T21:05:28Z

Source/Bricks/Image/ImageBrick.swift

@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ open class ImageBrickCell: GenericBrickCell, Bricklike, AsynchronousResizableCel
    fileprivate var imageLoaded = false
    fileprivate var currentImageURL: URL? = nil

-    @IBOutlet public weak var imageView: UIImageView!
+    @IBOutlet weak var imageView: UIImageView!


Why was this changed?

…-archive#164. This fixes issue where scrolling in a carousel that used collection brick caused cells above to re-size to a smaller size than what was already calculated

Revert change in PR #164

rubencagnie reviewed Jul 20, 2017

View reviewed changes

jay18001 force-pushed the invalidating-heights-animated branch 3 times, most recently from 96a669d to 4ca390e Compare July 24, 2017 20:20

rubencagnie suggested changes Jul 24, 2017

View reviewed changes

klundberg reviewed Jul 24, 2017

View reviewed changes

jay18001 force-pushed the invalidating-heights-animated branch from 4ca390e to 3359fd5 Compare July 25, 2017 17:44

jay18001 force-pushed the invalidating-heights-animated branch from 3359fd5 to 4a3b004 Compare July 27, 2017 20:48

rubencagnie approved these changes Jul 27, 2017

View reviewed changes

Fixed the invalidating heights animation

0ac6344

jay18001 force-pushed the invalidating-heights-animated branch from 4a3b004 to 0ac6344 Compare July 27, 2017 21:13

rubencagnie merged commit bb7128a into master Jul 28, 2017

rubencagnie added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2017

Merge pull request #186 from wfsttam/revert-BrickFlowLayout-change

ac21e28

Revert change in PR #164

jay18001 deleted the invalidating-heights-animated branch November 2, 2017 18:26

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fixed the invalidating heights animation #164

Fixed the invalidating heights animation #164

jay18001 commented Jul 20, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 20, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 24, 2017

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017 •

edited

rubencagnie Jul 24, 2017

klundberg Jul 24, 2017

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 27, 2017

jay18001 Jul 27, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 24, 2017

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 24, 2017

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 24, 2017

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 27, 2017

jay18001 Jul 27, 2017 •

edited

klundberg Jul 24, 2017

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017

codecov-io commented Jul 25, 2017 •

edited

rubencagnie Jul 27, 2017

rubencagnie Jul 27, 2017

Fixed the invalidating heights animation #164

Fixed the invalidating heights animation #164

Conversation

jay18001 commented Jul 20, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jay18001 Jul 27, 2017 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codecov-io commented Jul 25, 2017 • edited

Codecov Report

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jay18001 Jul 25, 2017 •

edited

jay18001 Jul 27, 2017 •

edited

codecov-io commented Jul 25, 2017 •

edited