In this section, we will look at how to define a protocol and how to add requirements to it. This will give us a basic understanding of the protocol. The rest of the chapter will build on this understanding.

The syntax we use to define a protocol is very similar to the syntax used to define a class, structure, or enumeration. The following example shows the syntax used to define a protocol:

Protocol MyProtocol { 
  //protocol definition here 
} 

To define the protocol, we use the protocol keyword followed by the name of the protocol. We then put the requirements, which our protocol defines, between curly brackets. Custom types can state that they conform to a particular protocol by placing the name of the protocol after the type's name, separated by a colon. The following example shows how we would define that a structure conforms to a protocol:

struct MyStruct: MyProtocol { 
  //structure implementation here 
} 

A type can also conform to multiple protocols. We list the multiple protocols that the type conforms to by separating them with commas:

struct MyStruct: MyProtocol, AnotherProtocol, ThirdProtocol { 
  // Structure implementation here 
} 

Having a type conform to multiple protocols is a very important concept within protocol- oriented programming, as we will see later in the chapter and throughout this book. This concept is known as protocol composition.

Now let's see how we would add property requirements to our protocol.

A protocol can require that the conforming types provide certain properties with specified names and types. The protocol does not say whether the property should be a stored or computed property because the implementation details are left up to the conforming types.

When defining a property within a protocol, we must specify whether the property is a read-only or a read-write property by using the get and set keywords. We also need to specify the property's type since we cannot use the type inference in a protocol. Let's look at how we would define properties within a protocol by creating a protocol named FullName, as shown in the next example:

protocol FullName { 
  var firstName: String {get set} 
  var lastName: String {get set} 
} 

In this example, we define two properties named firstName and lastName, which are read-write properties. Any type that conforms to this protocol must implement both of these properties. If we wanted to define the property as read-only, we would define it using only the get keyword, as shown in the following code:

var readOnly: String {get} 

It is possible to define static properties by using the static keyword, as shown in the following example:

static var typeProperty: String {get} 

Now let's see how we would add method requirements to our protocol.

A protocol can require that the conforming types provide specific methods. These methods are defined within the protocol exactly as we define them within a class or structure, but without the curly brackets and method body. We can define that these methods are instance or type methods using the static keyword. Adding default values to the method's parameters is not allowed when defining the method within a protocol.

Let's add a method named getFullName() to the FullName protocol:

protocol FullName { 
  var firstName: String {get set}  
  var lastName: String {get set} 
 
  func getFullName() -> String 
} 

The fullName protocol now requires one method named getFullName() and two read-write properties named firstName and lastName.

For value types, such as the structure, if we intend for a method to modify the instances that it belongs to, we must prefix the method definition with the mutating keyword. This keyword indicates that the method is allowed to modify the instance it belongs to. The following example shows how to use the mutating keyword with a method definition:

mutating func changeName() 

If we mark a method requirement as mutating, we do not need to write the mutating keyword for that method when we adopt the protocol with a reference (class) type. The mutating keyword is only used with value (structures or enumerations) types.

There are times when we want protocols to define optional requirements. An optional requirement is a method or property that is not required to be implemented. To use optional requirements, we need to start off by marking the protocol with the @objc attribute.

To mark a property or method as optional, we use the optional keyword. The following example shows how we would create both an optional property and also an optional method:

@objc protocol Phone { 
  var phoneNumber: String {get set} 
  @objc optional var emailAddress: String {get set}  
  func dialNumber() 
  @objc optional func getEmail() 
} 

Now let's explore how protocol inheritance works.

Protocols can inherit requirements from one or more additional protocols and then add additional requirements. The following code shows the syntax for protocol inheritance:

protocol ProtocolThree: ProtocolOne, ProtocolTwo { 
  // Add requirements here 
} 

The syntax for protocol inheritance is very similar to class inheritance in Swift, except that we are able to inherit from more than one protocol. Let's see how protocol inheritance works. We will use the FullName protocol that we defined earlier and create a new protocol named Person:

protocol Person: FullName {  
  var age: Int {get set} 
} 

Now, when we create a type that conforms to the Person protocol, we must implement the requirements defined in the Person protocol, as well as the requirements defined in the FullName protocol. As an example, we could define a Student structure that conforms to the Person protocol, as shown in the following code:

struct Student: Person {  
  var firstName = ""  
  var lastName = ""  
  var age = 0 
 
  func getFullName() -> String {  
    return "\(firstName) \(lastName)"
  } 
} 

Note that in the Student structure, we implemented the requirements defined in both the FullName and Person protocols. However, the only protocol specified in the structure definition was the Person protocol. We only needed to list the Person protocol because it inherited all the requirements from the FullName protocol.

Now let's look at a very important concept in the protocol-oriented programming paradigm: Protocol composition.

Protocol composition lets our types adopt multiple protocols. This is a major advantage that we get when we use protocols rather than a class hierarchy because classes, in Swift and other single-inheritance languages, can only inherit from one superclass. The syntax for protocol composition is the same as the protocol inheritance that we just saw. The following example shows how we would use protocol composition:

struct MyStruct: ProtocolOne, ProtocolTwo, Protocolthree { 
  // implementation here 
} 

Protocol composition allows us to break our requirements into many smaller components rather than inheriting all requirements from a single protocol or single superclass. This allows our type families to grow in width rather than height, which means we avoid creating bloated types that contain requirements that are not needed by all conforming types. Protocol composition may seem like a very simple concept, but it is a concept that is essential to protocol-oriented programming. Let's look at an example of protocol composition so we can see the advantage we get from using it.

Let's say that we have the class hierarchy shown in the following diagram:

In this class hierarchy, we have a base class named Athlete. The Athlete base class then has two subclasses named Amateur and Pro. These classes are used depending on whether the athlete is an amateur athlete or a pro athlete. An amateur athlete may be a collegiate athlete, and we would need to store information such as which school they go to and their GPA. A pro athlete is one that gets paid for playing the game. For the pro athletes, we would need to store information such as what team they play for and their salary.

In this example, things get a little messy under the Amateur and Pro classes. As we can see, we have separate football player classes under both the Amateur and Pro classes (the AmFootballPlayer and ProFootballPlayer classes). We also have separate baseball classes under both the Amateur and Pro classes (the AmBaseballPlayer and ProBaseballPlayer classes). This will require us to have a lot of duplicate code between these classes.

With protocol composition, instead of having a class hierarchy where our subclasses inherit all functionality from a single superclass, we have a collection of protocols that we can mix and match in our types.

We can then use one or more of these protocols as needed for our types. For example, we can create an AmFootballPlayer structure that conforms to the Athlete, Amateur, and FootballPlayer protocols. We could then create the ProFootballPlayer structure that conforms to the Athlete, Pro, and FootballPlayer protocols. This allows us to be very specific about the requirements for our types and only adopt the requirements that we need.

From a pure protocol point of view, this last example may not make a lot of sense right now because protocols only define the requirements; however, in Chapter 3, Extensions, we will see how protocol extensions can be used to implement these types with minimal duplicate code.

Now let's look at how a protocol is a full-fledged type in Swift.

Even though no functionality is implemented in a protocol, they are still considered a full-fledged type in the Swift programming language, and can mostly be used like any other type. What this means is that we can use protocols as parameters or return types for a function. We can also use them as the type for variables, constants, and collections. Let's look at some examples of this. For these next few examples, we will use the following Person protocol:

protocol Person { 
  var firstName: String {get set} 
  var lastName: String {get set}  
  var birthDate: Date {get set}  
  var profession: String {get} 
  init (firstName: String, lastName: String, birthDate: Date) 
} 

In this Person protocol, we define four properties and one initializer.

For this first example, we will show how to use a protocol as a parameter and return type for a function, method, or initializer. Within the function itself, we also use the Person as the type for a variable:

func updatePerson(person: Person) -> Person {  
  var newPerson: Person 
  // Code to update person goes here  
  return newPerson 
} 

We can also use protocols as the type to store in a collection, as shown in the next example:

var personArray = [Person]() 
var personDict = [String: Person]() 

We can use the instance of any type that conforms to our protocol anywhere that the protocol type is required. Let's assume that we have two types named SwiftProgrammer and FootballPlayer that conform to the Person protocol. We can then use them as shown in this next example:

var myPerson: Person 
 
myPerson = SwiftProgrammer(firstName: "Jon", lastName: "Hoffman", birthDate: birthDateProgrammer) 
myPerson = FootballPlayer(firstName: "Dan", lastName: "Marino", birthdate: birthDatePlayer) 

As we saw earlier, we can use the Person protocol as the type for an array, which means that we can populate the array with instances of any type that conforms to the Person protocol. The following is an example of this (note that the bDateProgrammer and bDatePlayer variables are instances of the Date type that would represent the birth date of the individual):

var programmer = SwiftProgrammer(firstName: "Jon", lastName: "Hoffman",
                                 birthDate: bDateProgrammer) 
 
var player = FootballPlayer(firstName: "Dan", lastName: "Marino",
                            birthDate: bDatePlayer) 
 
var people: [Person] = [] people.append(programmer) people.append(player) 

What we are seeing in these last couple of examples is a form of polymorphism. To use protocols to their fullest potential, we need to understand what polymorphism is.

The word polymorphism comes from the Greek roots poly (meaning many) and morphe (meaning form). In programming languages, polymorphism is a single interface to multiple types (many forms). There are two reasons to learn the meaning of the word polymorphism. The first reason is that using such a fancy word can make you sound very intelligent in casual conversation. The second reason is that polymorphism provides one of the most useful programming techniques, not only in object-oriented programming but also in protocol-oriented programming.

Polymorphism lets us interact with multiple types through a single uniform interface. In the object-oriented programming world, the single uniform interface usually comes from a superclass, while in the protocol-oriented programming world, that single interface usually comes from a protocol.

In the last section, we saw two examples of polymorphism with Swift. The first example was the following code:

var myPerson: Person 
 
myPerson = SwiftProgrammer(firstName: "Jon", lastName: "Hoffman",
                           birthDate: birthDateProgrammer) 
myPerson = FootballPlayer(firstName: "Dan", lastName: "Marino", 
                          birthdate: birthDatePlayer) 

In this example, we had a single variable of the Person type. Polymorphism allowed us to set the variable to instances of any type that conforms to the Person protocol, such as the SwiftProgrammer or FootballPlayer types.

The other example of polymorphism was in the following code:

var programmer = SwiftProgrammer(firstName: "Jon", lastName: "Hoffman",
                                 birthDate: bDateProgrammer) 
 
var player = FootballPlayer(firstName: "Dan", lastName: "Marino", 
                            birthDate: bDatePlayer) 
 
var people: [Person] = []
people.append(programmer)
people.append(player) 

In this example, we created an array of Person types. Polymorphism allowed us to add instances of any types that conform to Person protocol to this array.

When we access an instance of a type through a single uniform interface, as we just showed, we are unable to access type-specific functionality. As an example, if we had a property in the FootballPlayer type that records the age of the player, we would be unable to access that property because it is not defined in the People protocol.

If we do need to access type-specific functionality, we can use type casting.

Type casting is a way to check the type of an instance and/or to treat the instance as a specified type. In Swift, we use the is keyword to check whether an instance is of a specific type and the as keyword to treat an instance as a specific type.

The following example shows how we would use the is keyword:

if person is SwiftProgrammer {  
  print("(person.firstName) is a Swift Programmer") 
} 

In this example, the conditional statement returns true if the Person instance is of the SwiftProgrammer type or false if it isn't. We can use the where statement in combination with the is keyword to filter an array to only return instances of a specific type. In the next example, we filter an array that contains instances of the Person protocol and have it only return those elements of the array that are instances of the SwiftProgrammer type:

for person in people where person is SwiftProgrammer { 
  print("(person.firstName) is a Swift Programmer") 
} 

Now let's look at how we would cast an instance to a specific type. To do this, we can use the as keyword. Since the cast can fail if the instance is not of the specified type, the as keyword comes in two forms: as? and as!. With the as? form, if the casting fails it returns a nil. With the as! form, if the casting fails a runtime error is thrown; therefore, it is recommended to use the as? form unless we are absolutely sure of the instance type or we perform a check of the instance type prior to doing the cast.

The following example shows how we would use the as? keyword to attempt to cast an instance of a variable to the SwiftProgammer type:

if let _ = person as? SwiftProgrammer {  
  print("(person.firstName) is a Swift Programmer") 
} 

Since the as? keyword returns an optional, in the last example we could use optional binding to perform the cast.

Now let's see how we can use associated types with protocols.

When defining a protocol, there are times when it is useful to define one or more associated types. An associated type gives us a placeholder name that we can use within the protocol in place of a type. The actual type to use for the associated type is not defined until the protocol is adopted. The associated type basically says: We do not know the exact type to use; therefore, when a type adopts this protocol it will define it. As an example, if we were to define a protocol for a queue, we would want the type that adopts the protocol to define the instance types that the queue contains rather than the protocol.

To define an associated type, we use the associatedtype keyword. Let's see how to use associated types within a protocol. In this example, we will illustrate the Queue protocol that will define the requirements needed to implement a queue:

protocol Queue {  
  associatedtype QueueType 
  mutating func addItem(item: QueueType)  
  mutating func getItem() -> QueueType?  
  func count() -> Int 
} 

In this protocol, we define one associated type named QueueType. We then use this associated type twice within the protocol. We use it first as the parameter type for the addItem() method. We then use it again when we define the return type of the getItem() method as an optional type.

Any type that implements the Queue protocol must specify the type to use for the QueueType placeholder, and must also ensure that only items of that type are used where the protocol requires the QueueType placeholder.

Let's look at how to implement Queue in a non-generic class called IntQueue. This class will implement the Queue protocol using the integer type:

struct IntQueue: Queue {  
  var items = [Int]() 
  mutating func addItem(item: Int) {  
    items.append(item) 
  } 
  mutating func getItem() -> Int? {  
    if items.count > 0 { 
      return items.remove(at: 0) 
    } 
    else { 
      return nil 
    } 
  } 
  func count() -> Int {  
    return items.count 
  } 
} 

As we can see in the IntQueue structure, we use the integer type for both the parameter type of the addItem() method and the return type of the getItem() method. In this example, we implemented the Queue protocol in a non-generic way. Generics in Swift allow us to define the type to use at runtime rather than compile time. We will show how to use associated types with generics in Chapter 4, Generics.

Now that we have explored protocols in some detail, let's look at how we can use them in the real world. In the next section, we will see how to use protocols to implement the delegation design pattern.

Delegation is used extensively within the Cocoa and Cocoa Touch frameworks. The delegation pattern is a very simple but powerful pattern where an instance of one type acts on behalf of another instance. The instance that is doing the delegating keeps a reference to the delegate instance, and then, when an action happens, the delegating instance calls the delegate, to perform the intended function. Sounds confusing? It really isn't.

This design pattern is implemented in Swift by creating a protocol that defines the delegates' responsibilities. The type that conforms to the protocol, known as the delegate, will adopt this protocol, guaranteeing that it will provide the functionality defined by the protocol.

For the example in this section, we will have a structure named Person. This structure will contain two properties of the String type, named firstName and lastName. It will also have a third property that will store the delegate instance. When either the firstName or lastName properties are set, we will call a method in the delegate instance that will display the full name. Since the Person structure is delegating the responsibility for displaying the name to another instance, it does not need to know or care how the name is being displayed. Therefore, the full name could be displayed in a console window or in a UILabel; alternatively, the message may be ignored altogether.

Let's start off by looking at the protocol that defines the delegate's responsibilities. We will name this delegate DisplayNameDelegate:

protocol DisplayNameDelegate {  
  func displayName(name: String) 
} 

In the DisplayNameDelegate protocol, we define one method that the delegate needs to implement named displayName(). It is assumed that within this method the delegate will somehow display the name; however, it is not required. The only requirement is that the delegate implements this method.

Now let's look at the Person structure that uses the delegate:

struct Person { 
  var displayNameDelegate: DisplayNameDelegate 
 
  var firstName = "" {  
    didSet { 
      displayNameDelegate.displayName(name: getFullName()) 
    } 
  } 
  var lastName = "" {  
    didSet { 
      displayNameDelegate.displayName(name: getFullName()) 
    } 
  } 
 
  init(displayNameDelegate: DisplayNameDelegate) {  
    self.displayNameDelegate = displayNameDelegate 
  } 
 
  func getFullName() -> String {  
    return "\(firstName) \(lastName)" 
  } 
} 

In the Person structure, we start off by adding the three properties, which are named displayNameDelegate, firstName, and lastName. The displayNameDelegate property contains an instance of the delegate type. This instance will be responsible for displaying the full name when the values of the firstName and lastName properties change.

Within the definitions for the firstName and lastName properties, we define the property observers. The property observers are called each time the value of the properties is changed. Within these property observers, is where we call the displayName() method of our delegate instance to display the full name.

Now let's create a type that will conform to the DisplayNameDelegate protocol. We will name this type MyDisplayNameDelegate:

struct MyDisplayNameDelegate: DisplayNameDelegate {  
  func displayName(name: String) { 
    print("Name: \(name)") 
  } 
} 

In this example, all we will do is print the name to the console. Now let's see how we would use this delegate:

var displayDelegate = MyDisplayNameDelegate() 
var person = Person(displayNameDelegate: displayDelegate) 
person.firstName = "Jon" 
person.lastName = "Hoffman" 

In this code, we begin by creating an instance of the MyDisplayNameDelegate type and then use that instance to create an instance of the Person type. Now when we set the properties of the Person instance, the delegate is used to print the full name to the console.

While printing the name to the console may not seem that exciting, the real power of the delegation pattern comes when our application wants to change the behavior. Maybe in our application we will want to send the name to a web service or display it somewhere on the screen or even ignore the change. To change this behavior, we simple need to create a new type that conforms to the DisplayNameDelegate protocol. We can then use this new type when we create an instance of the Person type.

Another advantage that we get from using the delegation pattern is loose coupling. In our example, we separated the logic part of our code from the view by using the delegate to display the name whenever the properties changed. Loose coupling promotes a separation of responsibility, where each type is responsible for very specific tasks; this makes it very easy to swap out these tasks when requirements change, because we all know that requirements change often.

So far in this chapter, we have looked at protocols from a coding point of view, now let's look at protocols from a design point of view.

With protocol-oriented programming, we should always begin our design with the protocols, but how should we design these protocols? In the object-oriented programming world, we have superclasses that contain all the base requirements for the subclasses. Protocol design is a little bit different.

In the protocol-oriented programming world, we use protocols instead of superclasses, and it is preferable to break the requirements into smaller, more specific protocols rather than having bigger monolithic protocols. In this section, we will look at how we can separate the requirements into smaller, very specific protocols and how to use protocol inheritance and composition. In Chapter 3, Extensions, we will take this a little further and show you how to add functionality to all types that conform to a protocol using protocol extensions.

For the example in this section, we will model something that I enjoy building: Robots. There are many types of robots with lots of different sensors, so our model will need the ability to grow and handle all the different options. Since all robots have some form of movement, we will start off by creating a protocol that will define the requirements for this movement. We will name this protocol RobotMovement:

protocol RobotMovement { 
  func forward(speedPercent: Double) 
  func reverse(speedPercent: Double) 
  func left(speedPercent: Double) 
  func right(speedPercent: Double) 
  func stop() 
} 

In this protocol, we define the five methods that all conforming types must implement. These methods will move the robot in the forward, reverse, left or right directions as well as stop the robot. This protocol will meet our needs if we only want the robot to travel in two dimensions but what if we had a flying robot? For this we would need our robot to also go up and down. For this we can use protocol inheritance to create a protocol that adds the additional requirements for traveling in three dimensions:

protocol RobotMovementThreeDimensions: RobotMovement { 
  func up(speedPercent: Double) 
  func down(speedPercent: Double) 
} 

Notice that we use protocol inheritance when we create this protocol to inherit the requirements from the original RobotMovement protocol. This allows us to use polymorphism as described in the Polymorphism with protocols sections of this chapter. This allows us to use instances of types that conform to either of these protocols interchangeably by using the interface provided by the RobotMovement protocol. We can then determine if the robot can travel in three dimensions by using the is keyword, as described in the Type casting with protocols section of this chapter, to see if the RobotMovement instance conforms to the RobotMovementThreeDimensions protocol or not.

Now we need to add some sensors to our design. We will start off by creating a Sensor protocol that all other sensor types will inherit from. This protocol will contain four requirements. The first two will be read-only properties that define the name and type for the sensor. We will need an initiator that lets us name the sensor and a method that will be used to poll the sensor:

protocol Sensor { 
  var sensorType: String {get} 
  var sensorName: String {get set} 
 
  init (sensorName: String) 
  func pollSensor() 
} 

The sensor type would be used to define the type of sensor and would contain a string, such as DHT22 Environment Sensor. The sensor name would let us distinguish between multiple sensors and would contain a string, such as Rear Environment Sensor. The pollSensor() method would be used to perform the default operation by the sensor. Generally, this method would be used to read the sensor at regular intervals.

Now we will create requirements for some specific sensor types. The following example shows how we would create the requirements for an environment sensor:

protocol EnvironmentSensor: Sensor { 
  func currentTemperature() -> Double 
  func currentHumidity() -> Double 
} 

This protocol inherits the requirements from the Sensor protocol and adds two additional requirements that are unique for environment sensors. The currentTemperature() method would return the last temperature reading from the sensor and the currentHumidity() method would return the last humidity reading from the sensor. The pollSensor() method from the Sensor protocol would be used to read the temperature and humidity at regular intervals. The pollSensor() method would probably run on a separate thread.

Let's go ahead and create a couple more sensor types:

protocol RangeSensor: Sensor { 
  func setRangeNotification(rangeCentimeter: Double,
                            rangeNotification: () -> Void) 
  func currentRange() -> Double 
} 
 
protocol DisplaySensor: Sensor { 
  func displayMessage(message: String) 
} 
 
protocol WirelessSensor: Sensor { 
  func setMessageReceivedNotification(messageNotification:
                                      (String) -> Void) 
  func messageSend(message: String) 
} 

You will notice that two of these protocols (RangeSensor and WirelessSensor) define methods that set notifications (setRangeNotification and setMessageReceivedNotifications). These methods accept closures in the method parameters and will be used within the pollSensor() method to notify robot code immediately if something has happened. With RangeSensor types, the closure would be called if the robot was within a certain distance of an object and with WirelessSensor types the closure would be called if a message came in.

There are two advantages that we get from a protocol-oriented design like this one. The first is each of the protocols only contain the specific requirements needed for their particular sensor type. The second is we are able to use protocol composition to allow a single type to conform to multiple protocols. As an example, if we have a Display sensor that has Wi-Fi built in, we would create a type that conforms to both the DisplaySensor and WirelessSensor protocols.

There are many other sensor types; however, this will give us a good start for our robot. Now let's create a protocol that will define the requirements for the robot types:

protocol Robot { 
  var name: String {get set} 
  var robotMovement: RobotMovement {get set} 
  var sensors: [Sensor] {get} 
 
  init (name: String, robotMovement: RobotMovement) 
  func addSensor(sensor: Sensor) 
  func pollSensors() 
} 

This protocol defines three properties, one initiator, and two methods that will need to be implemented by any type that conforms with this protocol. These requirements will give us the basic functionality needed for the robots.

It may be a bit confusing thinking about all these protocols, especially if we are used to having only a few superclass types. It usually helps to have a basic diagram of our protocols. The following image shows a diagram for the protocols that we just defined with the protocol hierarchy:

This gives us the basic idea of how we can design a protocol hierarchy. You will notice that each of the protocols define the specific requirements for each device type. In Chapter 6, Protocol-Oriented Programming, we will go into greater detail on how to model our requirements with protocols.

In this section, we used protocols to define the requirements for the components of a robot. Now it is your turn; take a moment and see if you can create a concrete implementation of the Robot protocol without creating any concrete implementations of the other protocols. The key to understanding protocols is understanding how to use them without the concrete types that conform to them. In the downloadable code for this book, we have a sample class named SixWheelRover that conforms to the Robot protocol that you can compare your implementation to.

Now let's see how Apple uses protocols in the Swift standard library.

Apple uses protocols extensively in the Swift standard library. The best resource that we have to see the makeup of the standard library is http://swiftdoc.org. This site shows us the types, protocols, operators, and globals that make up the standard library.

To see how Apple uses protocols, let's look at the Dictionary type. This is a very commonly used type but also one that has a pretty simple protocol hierarchy. From the http://swiftdoc.org/ main page, click on the Dictionary type. Then scroll about halfway down the page until you see the inheritance section that should look similar to the following image:

This section lists the protocols that the Dictionary type conforms to. If we click on the View Protocol Hierarchy link, we will see a graphical representation of the protocol hierarchy that will look similar to this:

As we can see from the diagram, the Dictionary type conforms to five different protocols. We can also see that the Collection protocol inherits requirements from the Sequence protocol.

From the http://swiftdoc.org/ main page, we can click on each of the protocols to see their requirements. From this site, we realize that Apple uses protocols extensively within the Swift standard library. We will be looking at this site as we go through this book to see how Apple uses the various technologies that we are discussing.

While protocols themselves may not seem very exciting, they are actually quite powerful. As we saw in this chapter, we are able to use them to create very specific requirements. We can then use protocol inheritance and protocol composition to create protocol hierarchies. We also saw how to implement the delegation patterns with protocols.

We concluded the chapter by showing how we can model a robot with sensors using the protocol and how Apple uses protocols in the Swift standard library.

In Chapter 3, Extensions, we will see how we can use protocol extensions to add functionality to types that conform to a protocol but before we do that, let's look at our type choices.