Soup Chef with App Intents: Migrating custom intents

At a glance

Project structure

Source bundle/
├── SoupChef/
│   ├── UI/
│   │   ├── OrderDetailViewController.swift
│   │   ├── AppDelegate.swift
│   │   ├── OrderHistoryViewController.swift
│   │   ├── SoupMenuViewController.swift
│   │   └── ConfigureMenuTableViewController.swift
│   └── App Intent/
│       ├── OrderSoup.swift
│       ├── SoupAppEntity.swift
│       └── ToppingAppEntity.swift
├── Shared/
│   └── Data/
│       ├── DataManager.swift
│       └── SoupMenuManager.swift
└── SoupChefIntentsUI/
    ├── InvoiceViewController.swift
    └── OrderConfirmedViewController.swift

Structure observations

• Architecturally prominent files are ranked from entry points and role-named declarations; resource-only paths are omitted.
• Primary languages: C/Objective-C header, Swift.
• The verified tree contains 15 project/configuration file(s) and 52 source declaration(s).

Overall architecture

flowchart LR
    N1["AppDelegate"]
    N2["ConfigureMenuTableViewController"]
    N3["DataManager"]
    N4["CLPlacemarkOptionsProvider"]
    N5["Intents / AppIntents APIs"]
    N1 --> N2
    N2 --> N3
    N3 --> N4
    N4 --> N5

Reference code

SoupChef/UI/AppDelegate.swift:13 — architecture anchor

@UIApplicationMain
class AppDelegate: UIResponder, UIApplicationDelegate {
    func application(_ application: UIApplication, handlerFor intent: INIntent) -> Any? {
        return OrderSoupIntentHandler()
    }
}

Interpretation

The arrows summarize the source-visible entry, role-named types or folders, and framework direction; when nodes come from structural folders, the sequence is a high-level interpretation rather than proof that every adjacent node calls the next. Ownership is claimed only where the next section cites a stored property or assignment. The diagram is intentionally limited to the dominant path into Intents.

Ownership and state

classDiagram
    UserDefaultsStorageDescriptor *-- String : key
    UserDefaultsStorageDescriptor o-- KeyPath : keyPath
    UserDefaultsStorageDescriptor o-- NSNotification : dataChangedNotificationKey
    DataManager *-- DispatchQueue : userDefaultsAccessQueue

Ownership evidence

Shared/Data/DataManager.swift:14 — stored dependency or nearest verified ownership anchor

struct UserDefaultsStorageDescriptor {
    /// A `String` value used as the key name when reading and writing to `UserDefaults`.
    let key: String

    /// A key path to a property on `UserDefaults` for observing changes.
    let keyPath: KeyPath<UserDefaults, Data?>
}

Composition arrows indicate a source-visible construction expression or locally owned value state; aggregation means the owner stores or receives a dependency without proving exclusive lifetime ownership.

Concurrency, scheduling, and thread safety

Evidence limit: actor isolation, async/await, or Task creation does not by itself prove background-thread execution; Sendable conformance alone does not prove thread-safe mutation.

@MainActor/MainActor.run, DispatchQueue.main, and RunLoop.main are reported as distinct isolation, queue, and event-loop mechanisms. A plain Task is kept separate from Task.detached; neither is labeled as a background thread.

Reference code

Shared/Data/DataManager.swift:30 — representative execution boundary

public class DataManager<ManagedDataType: Codable> {
    // ...
    private let userDefaultsAccessQueue = DispatchQueue(label: "User Defaults Access Queue")
    // ...
}

State propagation, frameworks, and dependencies

Evidence limit: an import proves a source-level compilation dependency at the cited line; it does not prove runtime use, architectural adoption, or whether a Swift package is a direct application dependency.

receive(on:) describes downstream delivery scheduling, while subscribe(on:) describes upstream subscription/request/cancel scheduling. An import Combine alone establishes neither behavior nor a Store, reducer, Redux, or other application architecture.

Class and protocol design

Shared/Support/Localizable.swift:11 — representative type boundary

protocol LocalizableShortcutString {
    // ...
    func localizedName(useDeferredIntentLocalization: Bool) -> String
}

The source explicitly defines local protocol relationships: MenuItemTopping → LocalizableShortcutString, MenuItem → LocalizableShortcutString, MenuItem → LocalizableCurrency, Order → LocalizableCurrency.

Access control

Reference code

Shared/Data/DataManager.swift:21 — representative boundary

public let dataChangedNotificationKey = NSNotification.Name(rawValue: "DataChangedNotification")

Swift declarations without a modifier are internal; explicit private, fileprivate, private(set), public, or open entries above are interpreted by language semantics. Objective-C/C samples instead rely on header and implementation boundaries, which are not equivalent to Swift lexical privacy.

Logic ownership and placement

Design patterns

Naming conventions

• Types: Controller: ConfigureMenuTableViewController, IntentViewController, InvoiceViewController, OrderConfirmedViewController, OrderDetailViewController; Delegate: AppDelegate, SceneDelegate; Handler: IntentHandler, OrderSoupIntentHandler; Manager: DataManager, SoupMenuManager, SoupOrderDataManager; Provider: CLPlacemarkOptionsProvider, SoupChefAppShortcutsProvider; View: AddToSiriCollectionViewCellContentView, InvoiceView, OrderConfirmedView, OrderPreviewView.
• Protocols: LocalizableShortcutString, LocalizableCurrency.
• Methods: awakeFromNib, present, addVoiceShortcutViewController, addVoiceShortcutViewControllerDidCancel, editVoiceShortcutViewController, editVoiceShortcutViewControllerDidCancel, configureCollectionView, createCollectionViewLayout.
• Files: SoupChef/UI/OrderDetailViewController.swift, Shared/Data/DataManager.swift, SoupChef/App Intent/OrderSoup.swift, SoupChef/UI/AppDelegate.swift, SoupChef/UI/OrderHistoryViewController.swift, SoupChef/UI/SoupMenuViewController.swift.

Architecture takeaways

• AppDelegate is the main source-visible entry or composition anchor for this sample.
• Framework work reaches SoupKit, UIKit, Intents, AppIntents through a deliberately small high-level chain; the detailed API graph remains inside the cited implementation files.
• Stored-property evidence identifies lifecycle collaboration; it does not by itself prove exclusive object ownership.
• Access-control conclusions separate verified language visibility from the likely design rationale.
• Local protocol relationships provide an explicit substitution boundary.

Source map

• Official Apple documentation