This is an example view:
I want to calculate a frame with a CGPoint
where I can spawn another card(UIView
) without touching any existing card. Ofcourse it is optional since the view can be full of cards, therefore there is no free spot.
This is how I can see any card on the screen and my function how it is now:
func freeSpotCalculator() -> CGPoint?{
var takenSpots = [CGPoint]()
for card in playableCards{
takenSpots.append(card.center)
}
}
I have no idea where to start and how to calculate a random CGPoint
on the screen. The random frame has the same width
and height
as a card in on the screen.
Best solution simplest/performance is to display card randomly BUT inside a grid. The trick is to have the grid bigger than the card size, so the card position inside the grid will be random.
Easy to check which position is occupy and cards will be on "random" frames.
1- Create a Collection View Controller with the total number of card u want to display (lets say.. max card that enter in the screen?)
2- Set the prototype cell size bigger than the card. If the card is 50x80 then the cell should be 70x110.
3- Add a UIImageView to the cell with constraints, this will be your card image
4- Create a UICollectionViewCell, with a method that set the card frames randomly inside the cell (modify the constraints)
Done!
Cells with no card will have no image or an empty cell as you wish. So to add a new card, just do a random between the empty cells and add the card with its random coordinates inside the cell.
Your UICollectionViewCell would like like this
And your Collections View Controller should like like this Collection View Image
I am not sure if you are planning to place all the cards in an orderly way. But if you do, you could do it like this.
Once the view is loaded, get all the possible card positions and store them in a map together with a number used as the key. Then you could generate a random number from 0 to the total number of possible card positions that you stored in the map. Then every time you occupy a position, clear a value from the map.
The idea
You know the width and height of your container UIView. And, each card has the same width and height. I would go about this by calculating a grid.
Even though you want to display cards randomly, relying on a grid will give you a standardized array of centers that you can use to generate the appearance of randomness (place a card at any random center that is a part of the grid, for example).
If you were to place a card at truly any random location, you might just want to use
CGRectIntersectsRect(card1.frame, card2.frame)
to detect collisions.The pattern
First, let's store the card width and height as constants.
As a basic proof of concept, let's say your container view width is 250 points. Let's say the card width is 5 points. That means you can fit 250 / 5 = 50 cards in one row, where one row has the height of one card.
The number of centers in a row = the number of cards in that row. Each center is the same distance apart. In the following diagram (if I can even call it that), the
[
and]
represent edges of a row. The-|-
represents a card, where|
is the center of the card.[ - | - - | - - | - - | - - | - ]
Notice how every center is two dashes away from the next center. The only consideration is that the center next to the edge is one dash away from the edge. In terms of cards, each center is one whole card away from the next, and the centers next to the edges are one half card away from the edges.
The key to the pattern
This pattern means that the x position of any card center in a specific row =
(cardWidth / 2) + (the card index * cardWidth)
. In fact, this pseudo-equation works for y positions as well.The code
Here's some Swift that creates an array of centers using this method.
This code should create a grid of centers for your cards. You could build a function around it that returns a random center for a card to be placed and keeps track of used centers.
Potential improvements
First, I think that the
centers
array could be made a matrix ([[CGPoint]]()
) for more logical storage of points.Second, this code currently makes the assumption that the width and height of the container view are divisible by the card width and height. For example, a container width of 177 and a card width of 5 would result in some problems. The code could be fixed a number of different ways to account for this.
You can try with CAShapeLayer and UIBezierPath.
I have created a sample project in swift with the above logic.
https://github.com/mcabasheer/find-free-space-in-uiview
You can change the width and height of new view. I have added a condition to stop looking for next free space after trying 50 times. This will help to avoid infinite loop.
As @davecom highlighted, taking a random number to add new view will waste the space and you will run out of space quickly. If you are able to maintain the free available space, you can add more sub views.
If you want to randomly place cards along the screen, you could do something like this:
The cards will then be positioned randomly above the existing cards.
The naive approach to this is very simple, but could be problematic once the screen fills up. Generate a random CGPoint with x coordinate between 0 and the screen width and a y coordinate between 0 and the screen height. Check if a rectangle with a center at that point intersects any existing view. If it does not, you have your random position.
Where this gets problematic is when the screen starts to fill up. At that point you could be trying many many random points before finding a place to put the card. You could also reach a situation where no more cards will fit. How do you know that you have reached that? Will your loop generating the random points just run forever?
A smarter solution is to keep track of the free spaces on the screen. Always generate your random points roughly within these free spaces. You could do this using a grid if approximate is close enough. Is there a card occupying each grid location? Then when the largest free space is smaller than the size of your card rectangle, you know you're done. It's a lot more work than the naive approach, but it's faster when the screen starts to fill up and you'll know for sure when you're done.
If you know that you will always have more screen space than the cards can possibly take up, the naive approach is fine.