假设我们知道Struct是值类型，Class是引用类型。

如果你不知道值类型和引用类型是什么，那么看看按引用传递和按值传递之间的区别是什么?

根据mikeash的帖子:

... Let's look at some extreme, obvious examples first. Integers are obviously copyable. They should be value types. Network sockets can't be sensibly copied. They should be reference types. Points, as in x, y pairs, are copyable. They should be value types. A controller that represents a disk can't be sensibly copied. That should be a reference type. Some types can be copied but it may not be something you want to happen all the time. This suggests that they should be reference types. For example, a button on the screen can conceptually be copied. The copy will not be quite identical to the original. A click on the copy will not activate the original. The copy will not occupy the same location on the screen. If you pass the button around or put it into a new variable you'll probably want to refer to the original button, and you'd only want to make a copy when it's explicitly requested. That means that your button type should be a reference type. View and window controllers are a similar example. They might be copyable, conceivably, but it's almost never what you'd want to do. They should be reference types. What about model types? You might have a User type representing a user on your system, or a Crime type representing an action taken by a User. These are pretty copyable, so they should probably be value types. However, you probably want updates to a User's Crime made in one place in your program to be visible to other parts of the program. This suggests that your Users should be managed by some sort of user controller which would be a reference type. e.g struct User {} class UserController { var users: [User] func add(user: User) { ... } func remove(userNamed: String) { ... } func ... } Collections are an interesting case. These include things like arrays and dictionaries, as well as strings. Are they copyable? Obviously. Is copying something you want to happen easily and often? That's less clear. Most languages say "no" to this and make their collections reference types. This is true in Objective-C and Java and Python and JavaScript and almost every other language I can think of. (One major exception is C++ with STL collection types, but C++ is the raving lunatic of the language world which does everything strangely.) Swift said "yes," which means that types like Array and Dictionary and String are structs rather than classes. They get copied on assignment, and on passing them as parameters. This is an entirely sensible choice as long as the copy is cheap, which Swift tries very hard to accomplish. ...

我个人不会这样命名我的类。我通常将我的命名为UserManager而不是UserController，但想法是一样的

另外，当你必须重写一个函数的每个实例(即它们没有任何共享功能)时，不要使用类。

所以不是一个类的几个子类。使用几个符合协议的结构体。

使用结构体的另一种合理情况是，当你想对新旧模型进行delta/diff运算时。对于引用类型，你不能开箱即用。对于值类型，突变是不共享的。

许多Cocoa api需要NSObject子类，这迫使你使用class。但除此之外，你可以使用以下苹果Swift博客中的案例来决定是使用struct / enum值类型还是类引用类型。

https://developer.apple.com/swift/blog/?id=10

对于类，您获得继承并通过引用传递，而结构则没有继承并通过值传递。

有很多关于Swift的WWDC会议，其中一个会议详细回答了这个问题。确保你看了这些，因为它会让你更快地跟上语言指南或iBook。

在这些回答中没有注意到的一点是，持有类和结构的变量可以是let，同时仍然允许对对象的属性进行更改，而对于结构则不能这样做。

如果你不希望变量指向另一个对象，但仍然需要修改对象，即在有许多实例变量的情况下，你希望一个接一个地更新，这是很有用的。如果它是一个结构，你必须允许变量被重置为另一个对象使用var，因为在Swift常量值类型正确地允许零突变，而引用类型(类)不这样做。

结构vs类

[堆栈vs堆] [值vs参考类型]

结构更可取。但是缺省情况下，Struct并不能解决所有问题。通常你会听说值类型是在堆栈上分配的，但这并不总是正确的。只有局部变量被分配到堆栈上

//simple blocks
struct ValueType {}
class ReferenceType {}

struct StructWithRef {
    let ref1 = ReferenceType()
}

class ClassWithRef {
    let ref1 = ReferenceType()
}

func foo() {
    
    //simple  blocks
    let valueType1 = ValueType()
    let refType1 = ReferenceType()
    
    //RetainCount
    //StructWithRef
    let structWithRef1 = StructWithRef()
    let structWithRef1Copy = structWithRef1
    
    print("original:", CFGetRetainCount(structWithRef1 as CFTypeRef)) //1
    print("ref1:", CFGetRetainCount(structWithRef1.ref1)) //2 (originally 3)
    
    //ClassWithRef
    let classWithRef1 = ClassWithRef()
    let classWithRef1Copy = classWithRef1
    
    print("original:", CFGetRetainCount(classWithRef1)) //2 (originally 3)
    print("ref1:", CFGetRetainCount(classWithRef1.ref1)) //1 (originally 2)
     
}

*你不应该使用/依赖retainCount，因为它没有提供有用的信息

检查堆栈或堆

在编译过程中SIL(Swift中间语言)可以优化你的代码

swiftc -emit-silgen -<optimization> <file_name>.swift
//e.g.
swiftc -emit-silgen -Onone file.swift

//emit-silgen -> emit-sil(is used in any case)
//-emit-silgen           Emit raw SIL file(s)
//-emit-sil              Emit canonical SIL file(s)
//optimization: O, Osize, Onone. It is the same as Swift Compiler - Code Generation -> Optimization Level

在那里你可以找到alloc_stack(在堆栈上的分配)和alloc_box(在堆上的分配)

(优化级别(SWIFT_OPTIMIZATION_LEVEL)]

结构比类快得多。同样，如果你需要继承，那么你必须使用Class。最重要的一点是类是引用类型，而结构是值类型。例如,

class Flight {
    var id:Int?
    var description:String?
    var destination:String?
    var airlines:String?
    init(){
        id = 100
        description = "first ever flight of Virgin Airlines"
        destination = "london"
        airlines = "Virgin Airlines"
    } 
}

struct Flight2 {
    var id:Int
    var description:String
    var destination:String
    var airlines:String  
}

现在让我们创建两者的实例。

var flightA = Flight()

var flightB = Flight2.init(id: 100, description:"first ever flight of Virgin Airlines", destination:"london" , airlines:"Virgin Airlines" )

现在让我们将这些实例传递给两个修改id、描述、目的地等的函数。

func modifyFlight(flight:Flight) -> Void {
    flight.id = 200
    flight.description = "second flight of Virgin Airlines"
    flight.destination = "new york"
    flight.airlines = "Virgin Airlines"
}

同时,

func modifyFlight2(flight2: Flight2) -> Void {
    var passedFlight = flight2
    passedFlight.id = 200
    passedFlight.description = "second flight from virgin airlines" 
}

so,

modifyFlight(flight: flightA)
modifyFlight2(flight2: flightB)

现在如果我们打印航班a的id和描述，我们得到

id = 200
description = "second flight of Virgin Airlines"

在这里，我们可以看到FlightA的id和描述被改变了，因为传递给modify方法的参数实际上指向FlightA对象(引用类型)的内存地址。

现在如果我们打印FLightB实例的id和描述，

id = 100
description = "first ever flight of Virgin Airlines"

这里我们可以看到FlightB实例没有改变，因为在modifyFlight2方法中，Flight2的实际实例是传递而不是引用(值类型)。