feat: Test Mode — test store products, purchase/restore overrides, dark mode UI

[yusuftor]

Summary

Core Test Mode

• TestModeManager: Detects test mode users from config (user ID, alias ID match) or bundle ID mismatch, fetches products from /v1/products endpoint, caches as StoreProduct
• StoreKitManager: In test mode, uses cached test products instead of fetching from StoreKit
• TransactionManager: Intercepts purchase and restore flows in test mode — shows test mode drawer/entitlement picker instead of real StoreKit transactions
• DeviceHelper: Forces isSandbox = "true" when test mode active so all events route to sandbox
• DependencyContainer: Wires TestModeManager to StoreKitManager and DeviceHelper after initialization
• ConfigManager: Triggers test product fetching after config load when test mode detected

TestModeBehavior Option

• Adds TestModeBehavior enum (.automatic, .whenEnabledForUser, .never, .always) to SuperwallOptions for explicit control over when test mode activates
• isTestEnvironment detects test runners via NSClassFromString("XCTestCase") but bypasses when SUPERWALL_UNIT_TESTS launch arg is present for internal unit tests

Dark Mode UI

• Adds dark branded header with Superwall logo to TestModePurchaseDrawer
• Replaces all hardcoded colors with semantic UIKit colors (.label, .secondaryLabel, .separator, etc.) for proper light/dark mode support
• Close button uses white tint on dark header background

Misc

• Fixes all SwiftLint violations in TestMode files
• Adds comprehensive test coverage for TestModeManager and all TestModeBehavior cases

Checklist

• All unit tests pass.
• All UI tests pass.
• Demo project builds and runs on iOS.
• Demo project builds and runs on Mac Catalyst.
• Demo project builds and runs on visionOS.
• I added/updated tests or detailed why my change isn't tested.
• I added an entry to the CHANGELOG.md for any breaking changes, enhancements, or bug fixes.
• I have run swiftlint in the main directory and fixed any issues.
• I have updated the SDK documentation as well as the online docs.
• I have reviewed the contributing guide

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[greptile-apps]

_{2 files reviewed, 2 comments}

_{Edit Code Review Agent Settings | Greptile}

[greptile-apps]

_{10 files reviewed, 5 comments}

_{Edit Code Review Agent Settings | Greptile}

[greptile-apps]

Additional Comments (2)

Sources/SuperwallKit/Config/Models/Config.swift
Config.encode changed semantics

Config.encode(to:) now always encodes web2appConfig, iosAppId, bundleIdConfig, and testModeUserIds (if present), whereas previously those fields were not encoded at all. If this Codable type is used for caching/round-tripping configs (e.g. persisted LatestConfig), this changes the on-disk JSON shape and can break decode expectations in older versions or any code assuming a server-shaped payload. If the intent is “cache the server response as-is”, consider keeping encoding symmetric with what the server sends, or isolating persistence to a dedicated type instead of changing Config’s encoding behavior.

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: Sources/SuperwallKit/Config/Models/Config.swift
Line: 118:142

Comment:
**Config.encode changed semantics**

`Config.encode(to:)` now always encodes `web2appConfig`, `iosAppId`, `bundleIdConfig`, and `testModeUserIds` (if present), whereas previously those fields were not encoded at all. If this `Codable` type is used for caching/round-tripping configs (e.g. persisted `LatestConfig`), this changes the on-disk JSON shape and can break decode expectations in older versions or any code assuming a server-shaped payload. If the intent is “cache the server response as-is”, consider keeping encoding symmetric with what the server sends, or isolating persistence to a dedicated type instead of changing `Config`’s encoding behavior.

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.

---

Sources/SuperwallKit/Config/ConfigManager.swift
MainActor isolation mismatch

presentTestModeModal is @MainActor, but it’s awaited directly from processConfig (which is not @MainActor). This will fail under strict concurrency checking / actor isolation rules. Wrap the call with await MainActor.run { ... } / Task { @MainActor in ... }, or make the caller main-actor isolated.

(See presentTestModeModal declaration later in this file.)

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: Sources/SuperwallKit/Config/ConfigManager.swift
Line: 438:446

Comment:
**MainActor isolation mismatch**

`presentTestModeModal` is `@MainActor`, but it’s awaited directly from `processConfig` (which is not `@MainActor`). This will fail under strict concurrency checking / actor isolation rules. Wrap the call with `await MainActor.run { ... }` / `Task { @MainActor in ... }`, or make the caller main-actor isolated.

(See `presentTestModeModal` declaration later in this file.)

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.

[greptile-apps]

_{5 files reviewed, 2 comments}

_{Edit Code Review Agent Settings | Greptile}