guard and defer joined us in Swift 2.0 to little fanfare. Both use cases were somewhat obvious initially and plenty of articles were written about how to use these features. guard in particular seemed to solve a few sticky problems that Swift programmers got into frequently but a more in-depth exploration of real world usage of these concepts was lacking. We’ll cover guard today and possibly defer in the future.

Guard combines two powerful concepts that we’re already used to in Swift: optional unwrapping and where clauses. The former allows us to avoid the pyramid of doom or its alternative, the very long if let statement. The latter attaches simple but powerful expressions with the where clause so we can further vet the results we’re validating.

When to use guard

If you’ve got a view controller with a few UITextField elements or some other type of user input, you’ll immediately notice that you must unwrap the textField.text optional to get to the text inside (if any!). isEmpty won’t do you any good here, without any input the text field will simply return nil.

So you have a few of these which you unwrap and eventually pass to a function that posts them to a server endpoint. We don’t want the server code to have to deal with nil values or mistakenly send invalid values to the server so we’ll unwrap those input values with guard first.

func submit () { guard let name = nameField.text else { show( "No name to submit" ) return } guard let address = addressField.text else { show( "No address to submit" ) return } guard let phone = phoneField.text else { show( "No phone to submit" ) return } sendToServer(name, address: address, phone: phone) } func sendToServer (name: String, address: String, phone: String) { ... }

You’ll notice that our server communication function takes non-optional String values as parameters, hence the guard unwrapping beforehand. The unwrapping is a little unintuitive because we’re used to unwrapping with if let which unwraps values for use inside a block. Here the guard statement has an associated block but it’s actually an else block - i.e. the thing you do if the unwrapping fails - the values are unwrapped straight into the same context as the statement itself.

// separation of concerns

Without guard

Without using guard , we’d end up with a big pile of code that resembles a pyramid of doom. This doesn’t scale well for adding new fields to our form or make for very readable code. Indentation can be difficult to follow, particularly with so many else statements at each fork.

func nonguardSubmit () { if let name = nameField.text { if let address = addressField.text { if let phone = phoneField.text { sendToServer(name, address: address, phone: phone) } else { show( "no phone to submit" ) } } else { show( "no address to submit" ) } } else { show( "no name to submit" ) } }

Yes, we could even combine all these if let statements into a single statement separated with commas but we would loose the ability to figure out which statement failed and present a message to the user.

If you start seeing this kind of code appear in one of your view controllers, it’s time to start thinking about how to do the same thing with guard .

Validation and testing with guard

One argument against using guard is that it encourages large and less testable functions by combining tests for multiple values all in the same place. If used naïvely this could be true but with the proper use, guard allows us to smartly separate concerns, letting the view controller deal with managing the view elements while the validation for these elements can sit in a fully tested validation class or extension.

Let’s take a look at this naïvely constructed guard statement with validation:

guard let name = nameField.text where name.characters.count > 3 && name.characters.count <= 16 , let range = name.rangeOfCharacterFromSet(NSCharacterSet.whitespaceAndNewlineCharacterSet()) where range.startIndex == range.endIndex else { show( "name failed validation" ) return } submit(name)

You can probably tell we’re stuffing too much functionality into a single line here. Not only do we check for existence of the name field, we also check that the name is between 3 and 16 characters in length and that it contains no newlines or whitespaces. This is busy enough to be nearly unreadable, and it’s unlikely to be tested because we can’t validate the name field without interacting with the UI and submitting the name to the server.

Realistically, this view controller could be handling 5 inputs and each should be checked for validity before it’s submitted. Each one could look just like this, leading to a truly massive view controller.

Here’s a better example of real world guard usage.

func tappedSubmitButton () { guard let name = nameField.text where isValid(name) else { show( "name failed validation" ) return } submit(name) } func isValid (name: String) -> Bool { // check the name is between 4 and 16 characters if ! ( 4. .. 16 ~= name.characters.count) { return false } // check that name doesn't contain whitespace or newline characters let range = name.rangeOfCharacterFromSet(.whitespaceAndNewlineCharacterSet()) if let range = range where range.startIndex != range.endIndex { return false } return true }

You’ll notice a few differences in the updated version. First, our name validation function is separated into a testable validation function (located either in your view controller or in a different, fully tested class depending on your preferences). isValid has clearly marked steps for validating a name: a length check and a character check.

Instead of cramming all that validation into the where clause, we simply call the isValid function from the where clause, failing the guard statement if the text is nil or fails validation.

Testing is great but the best part of this implementation is the clarity of code. tappedSubmitButton has a very small responsibility, much of which is unlikely to fail. View controllers are difficult to test on iOS using standard MVC organization (which, despite many new players, is still the clearest organizational pattern) so minimizing their responsibility or likelihood of failure is an important part of architecting your iOS app.

guard has clear use cases but can be tempting to use as part of a massive view controller. Separating your guard validation functions allows you to maintain more complex view controllers without loosing clarity or readability.

Questions or comments? Find us on twitter or submit an issue on github