试试https://github.com/kevin0571/STNetTaskQueue

在分开的类中创建API请求。

STNetTaskQueue将处理线程和委托/回调。

可针对不同协议进行扩展。

我想了解iOS中网络应用的基本、抽象和正确的架构方法

构建应用程序架构不存在“最好的”或“最正确的”方法。这是一个非常有创意的工作。您应该始终选择最直接和可扩展的体系结构，这对于任何开始开发您的项目的开发人员或您团队中的其他开发人员来说都是清楚的，但我同意，可以有“好”和“坏”的体系结构。

你说:

从经验丰富的iOS开发者那里收集最有趣的方法

I don't think that my approach is the most interesting or correct, but I've used it in several projects and satisfied with it. It is a hybrid approach of the ones you have mentioned above, and also with improvements from my own research efforts. I'm interesting in the problems of building approaches, which combine several well-known patterns and idioms. I think a lot of Fowler's enterprise patterns can be successfully applied to the mobile applications. Here is a list of the most interesting ones, which we can apply for creating an iOS application architecture (in my opinion): Service Layer, Unit Of Work, Remote Facade, Data Transfer Object, Gateway, Layer Supertype, Special Case, Domain Model. You should always correctly design a model layer and always don't forget about the persistence (it can significantly increase your app's performance). You can use Core Data for this. But you should not forget, that Core Data is not an ORM or a database, but an object graph manager with persistence as a good option of it. So, very often Core Data can be too heavy for your needs and you can look at new solutions such as Realm and Couchbase Lite, or build your own lightweight object mapping/persistence layer, based on raw SQLite or LevelDB. Also I advice you to familiarize yourself with the Domain Driven Design and CQRS.

首先，我认为，我们应该为网络创建另一个层，因为我们不想要肥胖的控制器或沉重的、不堪重负的模型。我不相信那些胖模特，瘦控制器之类的东西。但我相信瘦的一切方法，因为没有一个班应该是胖的，永远。所有的网络通常都可以抽象为业务逻辑，因此我们应该有另一个层，我们可以把它放在那里。服务层是我们所需要的:

它封装应用程序的业务逻辑，控制事务并协调其操作实现中的响应。

In our MVC realm Service Layer is something like a mediator between domain model and controllers. There is a rather similar variation of this approach called MVCS where a Store is actually our Service layer. Store vends model instances and handles the networking, caching etc. I want to mention that you should not write all your networking and business logic in your service layer. This also can be considered as a bad design. For more info look at the Anemic and Rich domain models. Some service methods and business logic can be handled in the model, so it will be a "rich" (with behaviour) model.

我经常广泛使用两个库:AFNetworking 2.0和ReactiveCocoa。我认为对于任何与网络和web服务交互或包含复杂UI逻辑的现代应用程序来说，它都是必须的。

体系结构

At first I create a general APIClient class, which is a subclass of AFHTTPSessionManager. This is a workhorse of all networking in the application: all service classes delegate actual REST requests to it. It contains all the customizations of HTTP client, which I need in the particular application: SSL pinning, error processing and creating straightforward NSError objects with detailed failure reasons and descriptions of all API and connection errors (in such case controller will be able to show correct messages for the user), setting request and response serializers, http headers and other network-related stuff. Then I logically divide all the API requests into subservices or, more correctly, microservices: UserSerivces, CommonServices, SecurityServices, FriendsServices and so on, accordingly to business logic they implement. Each of these microservices is a separate class. They, together, form a Service Layer. These classes contain methods for each API request, process domain models and always returns a RACSignal with the parsed response model or NSError to the caller.

I want to mention that if you have complex model serialisation logic - then create another layer for it: something like Data Mapper but more general e.g. JSON/XML -> Model mapper. If you have cache: then create it as a separate layer/service too (you shouldn't mix business logic with caching). Why? Because correct caching layer can be quite complex with its own gotchas. People implement complex logic to get valid, predictable caching like e.g. monoidal caching with projections based on profunctors. You can read about this beautiful library called Carlos to understand more. And don't forget that Core Data can really help you with all caching issues and will allow you to write less logic. Also, if you have some logic between NSManagedObjectContext and server requests models, you can use Repository pattern, which separates the logic that retrieves the data and maps it to the entity model from the business logic that acts on the model. So, I advice to use Repository pattern even when you have a Core Data based architecture. Repository can abstract things, like NSFetchRequest,NSEntityDescription, NSPredicate and so on to plain methods like get or put.

After all these actions in the Service layer, caller (view controller) can do some complex asynchronous stuff with the response: signal manipulations, chaining, mapping, etc. with the help of ReactiveCocoa primitives , or just subscribe to it and show results in the view. I inject with the Dependency Injection in all these service classes my APIClient, which will translate a particular service call into corresponding GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, etc. request to the REST endpoint. In this case APIClient is passed implicitly to all controllers, you can make this explicit with a parametrised over APIClient service classes. This can make sense if you want to use different customisations of the APIClient for particular service classes, but if you ,for some reasons, don't want extra copies or you are sure that you always will use one particular instance (without customisations) of the APIClient - make it a singleton, but DON'T, please DON'T make service classes as singletons.

Then each view controller again with the DI injects the service class it needs, calls appropriate service methods and composes their results with the UI logic. For dependency injection I like to use BloodMagic or a more powerful framework Typhoon. I never use singletons, God APIManagerWhatever class or other wrong stuff. Because if you call your class WhateverManager, this indicates than you don't know its purpose and it is a bad design choice. Singletons is also an anti-pattern, and in most cases (except rare ones) is a wrong solution. Singleton should be considered only if all three of the following criteria are satisfied:

单个实例的所有权不能合理分配的; 延迟初始化是可取的; 另外没有提供全局访问。

在我们的例子中，单个实例的所有权不是问题，而且在我们将上帝管理器划分为服务之后，我们也不需要全局访问，因为现在只有一个或几个专用控制器需要特定的服务(例如UserProfile控制器需要UserServices等等)。

我们应该始终尊重SOLID中的S原则，并使用关注点分离，所以不要将所有的服务方法和网络调用放在一个类中，因为这很疯狂，特别是如果您开发的是大型企业应用程序。这就是为什么我们应该考虑依赖注入和服务方法。我认为这种方法是现代的、后面向对象的。在本例中，我们将应用程序分为两部分:控制逻辑(控制器和事件)和参数。

一种参数是普通的“数据”参数。这就是我们传递函数、操作、修改、持久化等的方法。它们是实体、聚合、集合和案例类。另一种是“服务”参数。这些类封装业务逻辑，允许与外部系统通信，提供数据访问。

下面是我的体系结构的一般工作流示例。假设我们有一个FriendsViewController，它显示用户的好友列表，我们有一个选项可以从好友中删除。我在我的FriendsServices类中创建了一个方法:

- (RACSignal *)removeFriend:(Friend * const)friend

where Friend is a model/domain object (or it can be just a User object if they have similar attributes). Underhood this method parses Friend to NSDictionary of JSON parameters friend_id, name, surname, friend_request_id and so on. I always use Mantle library for this kind of boilerplate and for my model layer (parsing back and forward, managing nested object hierarchies in JSON and so on). After parsing it calls APIClient DELETE method to make an actual REST request and returns Response in RACSignal to the caller (FriendsViewController in our case) to display appropriate message for the user or whatever.

If our application is a very big one, we have to separate our logic even clearer. E.g. it is not *always* good to mix `Repository` or model logic with `Service` one. When I described my approach I had said that `removeFriend` method should be in the `Service` layer, but if we will be more pedantic we can notice that it better belongs to `Repository`. Let's remember what Repository is. Eric Evans gave it a precise description in his book [DDD]: A Repository represents all objects of a certain type as a conceptual set. It acts like a collection, except with more elaborate querying capability. So, a Repository is essentially a facade that uses Collection style semantics (Add, Update, Remove) to supply access to data/objects. That's why when you have something like: getFriendsList, getUserGroups, removeFriend you can place it in the Repository, because collection-like semantics is pretty clear here. And code like: - (RACSignal *)approveFriendRequest:(FriendRequest * const)request; is definitely a business logic, because it is beyond basic CRUD operations and connect two domain objects (Friend and Request), that's why it should be placed in the Service layer. Also I want to notice: don't create unnecessary abstractions. Use all these approaches wisely. Because if you will overwhelm your application with abstractions, this will increase its accidental complexity, and complexity causes more problems in software systems than anything else I describe you an "old" Objective-C example but this approach can be very easy adapted for Swift language with a lot more improvements, because it has more useful features and functional sugar. I highly recommend to use this library: Moya. It allows you to create a more elegant APIClient layer (our workhorse as you remember). Now our APIClient provider will be a value type (enum) with extensions conforming to protocols and leveraging destructuring pattern matching. Swift enums + pattern matching allows us to create algebraic data types as in classic functional programming. Our microservices will use this improved APIClient provider as in usual Objective-C approach. For model layer instead of Mantle you can use ObjectMapper library or I like to use more elegant and functional Argo library. So, I described my general architectural approach, which can be adapted for any application, I think. There can be a lot more improvements, of course. I advice you to learn functional programming, because you can benefit from it a lot, but don't go too far with it too. Eliminating excessive, shared, global mutable state, creating an immutable domain model or creating pure functions without external side-effects is, generally, a good practice, and new Swift language encourages this. But always remember, that overloading your code with heavy pure functional patterns, category-theoretical approaches is a bad idea, because other developers will read and support your code, and they can be frustrated or scary of the prismatic profunctors and such kind of stuff in your immutable model. The same thing with the ReactiveCocoa: don't RACify your code too much, because it can become unreadable really fast, especially for newbies. Use it when it can really simplify your goals and logic. So, read a lot, mix, experiment, and try to pick up the best from different architectural approaches. It is the best advice I can give you.

在设计应用程序时，我避免使用单例。他们是很多人的典型选择，但我认为你可以在其他地方找到更优雅的解决方案。通常我做的是在CoreData中构建我的实体，然后把我的REST代码放在NSManagedObject类别中。例如，如果我想创建并POST一个新用户，我会这样做:

User* newUser = [User createInManagedObjectContext:managedObjectContext];
[newUser postOnSuccess:^(...) { ... } onFailure:^(...) { ... }];

我使用RESTKit进行对象映射，并在启动时初始化它。我发现通过单例路由您的所有调用是浪费时间，并添加了许多不需要的样板文件。

在NSManagedObject + Extensions.m:

+ (instancetype)createInContext:(NSManagedObjectContext*)context
{
    NSAssert(context.persistentStoreCoordinator.managedObjectModel.entitiesByName[[self entityName]] != nil, @"Entity with name %@ not found in model. Is your class name the same as your entity name?", [self entityName]);
    return [NSEntityDescription insertNewObjectForEntityForName:[self entityName] inManagedObjectContext:context];
}

在NSManagedObject + Networking.m:

- (void)getOnSuccess:(RESTSuccess)onSuccess onFailure:(RESTFailure)onFailure blockInput:(BOOL)blockInput
{
    [[RKObjectManager sharedManager] getObject:self path:nil parameters:nil success:onSuccess failure:onFailure];
    [self handleInputBlocking:blockInput];
}

当可以通过类别扩展公共基类的功能时，为什么还要添加额外的helper类呢?

如果你对我的解决方案更详细的信息感兴趣，请告诉我。我很乐意分享。

因为所有iOS应用程序都是不同的，所以我认为这里有不同的方法可以考虑，但我通常是这样做的: 创建一个中央管理器(单例)类来处理所有API请求(通常命名为apiccommunicator)，每个实例方法都是一个API调用。有一个中心(非公共)方法:

-(RACSignal *)sendGetToServerToSubPath:(NSString *)path withParameters:(NSDictionary *)params;

For the record, I use 2 major libraries/frameworks, ReactiveCocoa and AFNetworking. ReactiveCocoa handles async networking responses perfectly, you can do (sendNext:, sendError:, etc.). This method calls the API, gets the results and sends them through RAC in 'raw' format (like NSArray what AFNetworking returns). Then a method like getStuffList: which called the above method subscribes to it's signal, parses the raw data into objects (with something like Motis) and sends the objects one by one to the caller (getStuffList: and similar methods also return a signal that the controller can subscribe to). The subscribed controller receives the objects by subscribeNext:'s block and handles them. I tried many ways in different apps but this one worked the best out of all so I've been using this in a few apps recently, it fits both small and big projects and it's easy to extend and maintain if something needs to be modified. Hope this helps, I'd like to hear others' opinions about my approach and maybe how others think this could be maybe improved.

我认为目前中型项目使用MVVM架构，大型项目使用VIPER架构 并努力实现

面向协议编程 软件设计模式 S.O.L.D原则 泛型编程 不要重复自己(DRY)

以及构建iOS网络应用程序的架构方法(REST客户端)

对于代码干净易读的分离问题，避免重复:

import Foundation
enum DataResponseError: Error {
    case network
    case decoding

    var reason: String {
        switch self {
        case .network:
            return "An error occurred while fetching data"
        case .decoding:
            return "An error occurred while decoding data"
        }
    }
}

extension HTTPURLResponse {
    var hasSuccessStatusCode: Bool {
        return 200...299 ~= statusCode
    }
}

enum Result<T, U: Error> {
    case success(T)
    case failure(U)
}

依存关系反演

 protocol NHDataProvider {
        func fetchRemote<Model: Codable>(_ val: Model.Type, url: URL, completion: @escaping (Result<Codable, DataResponseError>) -> Void)
    }

主要负责:

  final class NHClientHTTPNetworking : NHDataProvider {

        let session: URLSession

        init(session: URLSession = URLSession.shared) {
            self.session = session
        }

        func fetchRemote<Model: Codable>(_ val: Model.Type, url: URL,
                             completion: @escaping (Result<Codable, DataResponseError>) -> Void) {
            let urlRequest = URLRequest(url: url)
            session.dataTask(with: urlRequest, completionHandler: { data, response, error in
                guard
                    let httpResponse = response as? HTTPURLResponse,
                    httpResponse.hasSuccessStatusCode,
                    let data = data
                    else {
                        completion(Result.failure(DataResponseError.network))
                        return
                }
                guard let decodedResponse = try? JSONDecoder().decode(Model.self, from: data) else {
                    completion(Result.failure(DataResponseError.decoding))
                    return
                }
                completion(Result.success(decodedResponse))
            }).resume()
        }
    }

你会发现这里是GitHub MVVM架构与rest API Swift项目

根据这个问题的目的，我想描述一下我们的架构方法。

体系结构方法

我们通用的iOS应用的架构基于以下模式:服务层、MVVM、UI数据绑定、依赖注入;函数式响应式编程范式。

我们可以将一个典型的面向消费者的应用程序划分为以下逻辑层:

组装 模型 服务 存储 经理 协调员 用户界面 基础设施

组装层是应用程序的引导点。它包含一个依赖注入容器和应用程序对象及其依赖项的声明。这一层还可能包含应用程序的配置(url，第三方服务密钥等)。为此，我们使用了Typhoon库。

模型层包含域模型类、验证、映射。我们使用Mantle库来映射我们的模型:它支持序列化/反序列化到JSON格式和NSManagedObject模型。对于模型的验证和表单表示，我们使用FXForms和FXModelValidation库。

服务层声明了用于与外部系统交互的服务，以便发送或接收在域模型中表示的数据。因此，通常我们有用于与服务器api(每个实体)通信的服务、消息传递服务(如PubNub)、存储服务(如Amazon S3)等。基本上，服务包装SDK(例如PubNub SDK)提供的对象或实现它们自己的通信逻辑。对于一般的网络，我们使用AFNetworking库。

存储层的目的是组织设备上的本地数据存储。为此我们使用Core Data或Realm(两者都有优缺点，使用哪个取决于具体的规格)。对于CoreData设置，我们使用MDMCoreData库和一堆类-存储-(类似于服务)，它们为每个实体提供对本地存储的访问。对于Realm，我们只是使用类似的存储来访问本地存储。

管理层是我们的抽象/包装器所在的地方。

经理角色可以是:

凭据管理器及其不同的实现(keychain, NSDefaults，…) 当前会话管理器，知道如何保持和提供当前用户会话 捕获管道，提供对媒体设备的访问(视频录制，音频，拍照) BLE管理器，提供对蓝牙服务和外围设备的访问 地理位置管理器 .．.

因此，管理器的角色可以是任何实现应用程序工作所需的特定方面或关注点的逻辑的对象。

我们尽量避免singleton，但是如果需要的话，这一层是他们居住的地方。

协调器层提供依赖于其他层(服务、存储、模型)对象的对象，以便将它们的逻辑组合成特定模块(功能、屏幕、用户故事或用户体验)所需的一个工作序列。它通常链接异步操作，并知道如何对它们的成功和失败情况作出反应。作为一个例子，您可以想象一个消息传递特性和对应的MessagingCoordinator对象。处理发送消息操作可能是这样的:

验证消息(模型层) 本地保存消息(消息存储) 上传消息附件(amazon s3服务) 更新消息状态和附件url并在本地保存消息(消息存储) 将消息序列化为JSON格式(模型层) 向PubNub发布消息(PubNub服务) 更新消息状态和属性并将其保存在本地(消息存储)

在上述每一个步骤中，都会相应地处理一个错误。

UI层由以下子层组成:

视图模型 视图控制器 视图

为了避免大量的视图控制器，我们使用MVVM模式，并在视图模型中实现UI表示所需的逻辑。ViewModel通常有协调器和管理器作为依赖项。viewcontroller和某些类型的视图(例如表视图单元格)使用的viewmodel。视图控制器和视图模型之间的粘合剂是数据绑定和命令模式。为了使它有可能有胶水，我们使用ReactiveCocoa库。

我们还使用ReactiveCocoa及其RACSignal概念作为所有协调器、服务和存储方法的接口和返回值类型。这允许我们链式操作，并行或串行运行它们，以及ReactiveCocoa提供的许多其他有用的东西。

我们尝试以声明式的方式实现UI行为。数据绑定和自动布局有助于实现这一目标。

基础设施层包含应用程序工作所需的所有帮助程序、扩展和实用程序。

这种方法对我们和我们通常构建的那些类型的应用都很有效。但你应该明白，这只是一种主观的方法，应该根据具体的团队目的进行调整/改变。

希望这对你有所帮助!

你也可以在这篇文章中找到更多关于iOS开发过程的信息