I am working on my Final Year Project and I am really stuck on the decision should I use callbacks or coroutines of Kotlin. I created separate Module for the firebase where all its operations are done there weather its data retrieval or any other functionalities.
the problem is that whenever I return the user from the function it return null due than I understand it due to the async calls and after that I used call back for it like this:
fun getUserAsModel(callback: (User) -> Unit) {
FirebaseAuth.getInstance().uid?.let {
firestore.collection(Constants.FireCollections.USERS)
.document(it)
.get()
.addOnSuccessListener { it1 ->
val user = it1.toObject(User::class.java)?.let { it2 ->
callback(it2)
}
}
.addOnFailureListener {
Log.e(TAG, "In userModel()->", it)
it.stackTrace
}
}
}
But I see in many forms that I should I use coroutines and now I am using this approach but it does not work:
fun getUser () : User? {
var user:User? = null
val collection = firestore.collection(Constants.FireCollections.USERS)
val document = collection.document(FirebaseAuthRepository().getCurrentUserId())
try {
scope.launch {
val snapshot = document.get().await()
user = snapshot.toObject(User::class.java)
}
} catch (e:FirebaseFirestoreException) {
Log.e(TAG, "In getUser() -> " ,e)
e.stackTrace
}
return user
}
I am still stuck because every time I use getUser() I need to launch the scope of coroutines and this is really makes the code juncky.
I would like to know about your solution how should I properly implement this. Thanks
You're recreating the same problem you had with the asynchronous call, since a coroutine is launched asynchronously. The correct way to do it with a coroutine is to make it a suspend function and directly return the user without launching another coroutine inside this function.
The function should look like this:
suspend fun getUser () : User? {
val collection = firestore.collection(Constants.FireCollections.USERS)
val document = collection.document(FirebaseAuthRepository().getCurrentUserId())
return try {
val snapshot = document.get().await()
snapshot.toObject(User::class.java)
} catch (e: FirebaseFirestoreException) {
Log.e(TAG, "In getUser() -> ", e)
null
}
}
Callbacks versus coroutines is a matter of preference. Coroutines are not trivial to learn, but once you do, your code will be cleaner-looking and easier to follow.
You can also use callbackflow
fun getUserAsModel():Flow<User?> {
return callbackFlow {
FirebaseAuth.getInstance().uid?.let {
firestore.collection(Constants.FireCollections.USERS)
.document(it)
.get()
.addOnSuccessListener { it1 ->
val user = it1.toObject(User::class.java)
trySend(user)
}
.addOnFailureListener {
Log.e(TAG, "In userModel()->", it)
it.stackTrace
cancel(it)
}
awaitClose { close() }
}
}
}
Related
I was trying to implement an approach to fetch products from two Data sources (Room & FirebaseFirestore) using Flows.
It was working fine until I noticed that the debugger was returning to the same break point infinitely. When the execution of "ViewmMdel.insertProducts(products)" ends, the debugger returns to Repository.getProducts(//) & repeats.
I changed the approach using only suspending functions & coroutines & works fine but I am curious about how I must to use Flows to implement this approach.
Maybe is only that flatMapMerge is in preview version.
Thanks in advance :D
This one is the implementation:
ViewModel:
fun getProductNames(companyName: String) {
viewModelScope.launch {
repository.getProducts(companyName).catch {
_event.value = AddSaleEvents.ShouldShowLoading(false)
_event.value = AddSaleEvents.ProductsFailureResponse(it.message.toString())
}.collect { products ->
productsList = products
if (products != emptyList<Product>()) {
_event.value = AddSaleEvents.ShouldShowLoading(false)
_event.value = AddSaleEvents.ProductsSuccessfulResponse(products)
insertProducts(products)
} else {
_event.value = AddSaleEvents.ShouldShowLoading(false)
_event.value = AddSaleEvents.ProductsSuccessfulResponse(products)
}
}
}
}
Repository:
#OptIn(FlowPreview::class)
override suspend fun getProducts(compnayName: String): Flow<List<Product>> {
return localDataSource.getProducts().flatMapMerge { list -> // LINE RUNNING INFINITELY
getProductsFromFirebase(list, compnayName)
}.flowOn(Dispatchers.IO).catch {
Log.d("Error", it.message.toString())
}
}
private fun getProductsFromFirebase(products: List<Product>, compnayName: String) = flow {
if (products.isEmpty()) {
remoteDataSource.getProducts(compnayName).collect {
emit(it)
}
} else {
emit(products)
}
}
LocalDataSource with Room:
override suspend fun getProducts(): Flow<List<Product>> = saleDao.getProducts()
Firebase Data Source:
override suspend fun getProducts(company: String): Flow<List<Product>> = flow {
val response = fireStore.collection("products").whereEqualTo("company", company).get()
response.await()
if (response.isSuccessful && !response.result.isEmpty) {
emit(response.result.toObjects(FirebaseProduct::class.java).toEntity())
}
}.catch {
Log.d("Error", it.message.toString())
}
How can I chain the response of a flow to trigger another one inside the MVVM Architecture + Clean Architecture?
6 if it is possible, I want to understand the reason the code is repeating infinitely.
Looks like insertProducts(products) triggers room's DAO.
So localDataSource.getProducts() is a observable read query
Observable queries are read operations that emit new values whenever there are changes to any of the tables that are referenced by the query.
Try to change LocalDataSource
interface SaleDao {
// fun getProducts(): Flow<List<Product>>
suspend fun getProducts(): List<Product>
}
I am making a network repository that supports multiple data retrieval configs, therefore I want to separate those configs' logic into functions.
However, I have a config that fetches the data continuously at specified intervals. Everything is fine when I emit those values to the original Flow. But when I take the logic into another function and return another Flow through it, it stops caring about its coroutine scope. Even after the scope's cancelation, it keeps on fetching the data.
TLDR: Suspend function returning a flow runs forever when currentCoroutineContext is used to control its loop's termination.
What am I doing wrong here?
Here's the simplified version of my code:
Fragment calling the viewmodels function that basically calls the getData()
lifecycleScope.launch {
viewModel.getLatestDataList()
}
Repository
suspend fun getData(config: MyConfig): Flow<List<Data>>
{
return flow {
when (config)
{
CONTINUOUS ->
{
//It worked fine when fetchContinuously was ingrained to here and emitted directly to the current flow
//And now it keeps on running eternally
fetchContinuously().collect { updatedList ->
emit(updatedList)
}
}
}
}
}
//Note logic of this function is greatly reduced to keep the focus on the problem
private suspend fun fetchContinuously(): Flow<List<Data>>
{
return flow {
while (currentCoroutineContext().isActive)
{
val updatedList = fetchDataListOverNetwork().await()
if (updatedList != null)
{
emit(updatedList)
}
delay(refreshIntervalInMs)
}
Timber.i("Context is no longer active - terminating the continuous-fetch coroutine")
}
}
private suspend fun fetchDataListOverNetwork(): Deferred<List<Data>?> =
withContext(Dispatchers.IO) {
return#withContext async {
var list: List<Data>? = null
try
{
val response = apiService.getDataList().execute()
if (response.isSuccessful && response.body() != null)
{
list = response.body()!!.list
}
else
{
Timber.w("Failed to fetch data from the network database. Error body: ${response.errorBody()}, Response body: ${response.body()}")
}
}
catch (e: Exception)
{
Timber.w("Exception while trying to fetch data from the network database. Stacktrace: ${e.printStackTrace()}")
}
finally
{
return#async list
}
list //IDE is not smart enough to realize we are already returning no matter what inside of the finally block; therefore, this needs to stay here
}
}
I am not sure whether this is a solution to your problem, but you do not need to have a suspending function that returns a Flow. The lambda you are passing is a suspending function itself:
fun <T> flow(block: suspend FlowCollector<T>.() -> Unit): Flow<T> (source)
Here is an example of a flow that repeats a (GraphQl) query (simplified - without type parameters) I am using:
override fun query(query: Query,
updateIntervalMillis: Long): Flow<Result<T>> {
return flow {
// this ensures at least one query
val result: Result<T> = execute(query)
emit(result)
while (coroutineContext[Job]?.isActive == true && updateIntervalMillis > 0) {
delay(updateIntervalMillis)
val otherResult: Result<T> = execute(query)
emit(otherResult)
}
}
}
I'm not that good at Flow but I think the problem is that you are delaying only the getData() flow instead of delaying both of them.
Try adding this:
suspend fun getData(config: MyConfig): Flow<List<Data>>
{
return flow {
when (config)
{
CONTINUOUS ->
{
fetchContinuously().collect { updatedList ->
emit(updatedList)
delay(refreshIntervalInMs)
}
}
}
}
}
Take note of the delay(refreshIntervalInMs).
With RxJava we can do something like this:
BaseViewModel
protected void subscribe(Completable completable, MutableLiveData<Response> response) {
mDisposable.add(
completable.observeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribeOn(Schedulers.io())
.doOnSubscribe(disposable -> response.setValue(Response.loading()))
.doFinally(() -> response.setValue(Response.idle()))
.subscribe(
() -> response.setValue(Response.success(true)),
e -> response.setValue(Response.error(e))
)
);
}
protected <T> void subscribe(Single<T> single, MutableLiveData<Response> response) {
mDisposable.add(
single.observeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribeOn(Schedulers.io())
.doOnSubscribe(disposable -> response.setValue(Response.loading()))
.doFinally(() -> response.setValue(Response.idle()))
.subscribe(
result -> response.setValue(Response.success(result)),
e -> response.setValue(Response.error(e))
)
);
}
Then, from repository we getting Single/Complete and pass it to our custom subscribe(), then we get generic Result with data(optional), very easy way to work with asynchronous requests.
How we can abstract coroutines with similar structure, instead of write Launch in every method in ViewModel and try/catch error manually?
Instead of closely following the code you already have with minimal adaptations, I suggest you review your design altogether when migrating to coroutines.
One important principle embedded into coroutines is structured concurrency. This isn't just about the coroutine scopes and cancellation, it is also about the use of futures by any name (be it CompletionStage, Deferred, Task, Single or any other). According to structured concurrency, a future is basically equivalent to a live thread that has no defined scope. You should avoid them.
Instead you should have clearly delineated places in the code that launch new concurrent work contained within a single top-level block of code provided at the launch site.
So far, that implies that you do have a launch block at each entry point into your code from the Android framework, and that's a lot of places due to the nature of the callback-oriented programming model.
However, everything within that block should be coded according to structured concurrency. If you have just one network call to make, your code is entirely sequential: make the call, get the response, process it. The network calls themselves become suspend functions that complete with the result of the call and do not accept callbacks. All the traditional design patterns from the world of blocking calls apply here.
See here for an intro to using coroutines with LiveData, it may help you map your design to the coroutine-oriented one:
https://developer.android.com/topic/libraries/architecture/coroutines#livedata
You are probably looking for something like this
CoroutineWrapper
fun <T> ViewModel.apiCx(context: CoroutineContext = Dispatchers.Default, init: suspend CxWrapper<T>.() -> Unit) {
val wrap = CxWrapper<T>(context)
wrap.launch {
try {
init.invoke(wrap)
callCx(wrap)
} catch (e: Exception) {
e.printStackTrace()
}
}
}
private fun <T> callCx(wrap: CxWrapper<T>) {
val response: Response<T>? = wrap.request
response?.let {
if (it.isSuccessful) {
wrap.success(it.body())
} else {
wrap.fail(Pair(it.code(), it.message()))
}
}
}
class CxWrapper<T>(override val coroutineContext: CoroutineContext) : CoroutineScope {
var request: Response<T>? = null
internal var success: (T?) -> Unit = {}
internal var fail: (Pair<Int, String?>) -> Unit = {}
fun success(onSuccess: (T?) -> Unit) {
success = onSuccess
}
fun error(onError: (Pair<Int, String?>) -> Unit) {
fail = onError
}
}
you can have this as a separate helper class and to use this from your ViewModel
apiCx<YourModelClass> {
request = yourApiCall()
success { yourModelClass ->
Log.d(TAG, "success")
}
error {
Log.e(TAG, "error")
}
}
You would just do the same, just adapted to coroutines. Just replace the different stream types with the suspension methods you need.
protected inline fun <T> MutableLiveData<Response>.subscribe(single: suspend () -> T) {
viewModelScope.launch {
try {
value = Response.loading()
value = withContext(Dispatchers.IO) {
Response.success(single())
}
} catch(e: Throwable) {
value = Response.error(e)
} finally {
value = Response.idle()
}
}
To use it just call with the livedata as receiver
responseLiveData.subscribe<T> {
singleFromRepo()
}
responseLiveData.subscribe<Unit> {
completableFromRepo()
}
I would like my app users to be able to cancel file upload.
My coroutine upload job in ViewModel looks like this
private var uploadImageJob: Job? = null
private val _uploadResult = MutableLiveData<Result<Image>>()
val uploadResult: LiveData<Result<Image>>
get() = _uploadResult
fun uploadImage(filePath: String, listener: ProgressRequestBody.UploadCallbacks) {
//...
uploadImageJob = viewModelScope.launch {
_uploadResult.value = withContext(Dispatchers.IO) {
repository.uploadImage(filePart)
}
}
}
fun cancelImageUpload() {
uploadImageJob?.cancel()
}
Then in the repository the Retrofit 2 request is handled like this
suspend fun uploadImage(file: MultipartBody.Part): Result<Image> {
return try {
val response = webservice.uploadImage(file).awaitResponse()
if (response.isSuccessful) {
Result.Success(response.body()!!)
} else {
Result.Error(response.message(), null)
}
} catch (e: Exception) {
Result.Error(e.message.orEmpty(), e)
}
}
When cancelImageUpload() it called the job gets cancelled and the exception gets caught in the repository but the result won't get assigned to uploadResult.value.
Any ideas please how to make this work?
PS: There is a similar question Cancel file upload (retrofit) started from coroutine kotlin android but it suggests using coroutines call adapter which is depricated now.
Have finally managed to make it work by moving withContext one level up like this
uploadImageJob = viewModelScope.launch {
withContext(Dispatchers.IO) {
_uploadResult.postValue(repository.uploadImage(filePart))
}
}
I am building an app based off of the Android Clean Architecture Kotlin version (https://github.com/android10/Android-CleanArchitecture-Kotlin).
Using this architecture, each time you want to invoke a use case, a Kotlin coroutine is launched and the result is posted in the main thread. This is achieved by this code:
abstract class UseCase<out Type, in Params> where Type : Any {
abstract suspend fun run(params: Params): Either<Failure, Type>
fun execute(onResult: (Either<Failure, Type>) -> Unit, params: Params) {
val job = async(CommonPool) { run(params) }
launch(UI) { onResult.invoke(job.await()) }
}
In his example architecture, Mr. Android10 uses Retrofit to make a synchronous api call inside the kotlin couroutine. For example:
override fun movies(): Either<Failure, List<Movie>> {
return when (networkHandler.isConnected) {
true -> request(service.movies(), { it.map { it.toMovie() } }, emptyList())
false, null -> Left(NetworkConnection())
}
}
private fun <T, R> request(call: Call<T>, transform: (T) -> R, default: T): Either<Failure, R> {
return try {
val response = call.execute()
when (response.isSuccessful) {
true -> Right(transform((response.body() ?: default)))
false -> Left(ServerError())
}
} catch (exception: Throwable) {
Left(ServerError())
}
}
'Either' represents a disjoint type, meaning the result will either be a Failure or the object of type T you want.
His service.movies() method is implemented like so (using retrofit)
#GET(MOVIES) fun movies(): Call<List<MovieEntity>>
Now here is my question. I am replacing retrofit with Google Cloud Firestore. I know that currently, Firebase/Firestore is an all async library. I want to know if anyone knows of a method more elegant way of making a synchronous API call to Firebase.
I implemented my own version of Call:
interface Call<T: Any> {
fun execute(): Response<T>
data class Response<T>(var isSuccessful: Boolean, var body: T?, var failure: Failure?)
}
and my API call is implemented here
override fun movieList(): Call<List<MovieEntity>> = object : Call<List<MovieEntity>> {
override fun execute(): Call.Response<List<MovieEntity>> {
return movieListResponse()
}
}
private fun movieListResponse(): Call.Response<List<MovieEntity>> {
var response: Call.Response<List<MovieEntity>>? = null
FirebaseFirestore.getInstance().collection(DataConfig.databasePath + MOVIES_PATH).get().addOnCompleteListener { task ->
response = when {
!task.isSuccessful -> Call.Response(false, null, Failure.ServerError())
task.result.isEmpty -> Call.Response(false, null, MovieFailure.ListNotAvailable())
else -> Call.Response(true, task.result.mapTo(ArrayList()) { MovieEntity.fromSnapshot(it) }, null)
}
}
while (response == null)
Thread.sleep(50)
return response as Call.Response<List<MovieEntity>>
}
Of course, the while loop at the end bothers me. Is there any other, more elegant ways, to wait for the response to be assigned before returning from the movieListResponse method?
I tried calling await() on the Task that is returned from the Firebase get() method, but the movieListResponse method would return immediately anyway. Thanks for the help!
So I found what I was looking for in the Google Tasks API: "If your program is already executing in a background thread you can block a task to get the result synchronously and avoid callbacks" https://developers.google.com/android/guides/tasks#blocking
So my previous problematic code becomes:
private fun movieListResponse(): Call.Response<List<MovieEntity>> {
return try {
val taskResult = Tasks.await(FirebaseFirestore.getInstance().
collection(DataConfig.databasePath + MOVIES_PATH).get(), 2, TimeUnit.SECONDS)
Call.Response(true, taskResult.mapTo(ArrayList()) { MovieEntity.fromSnapshot(it) }, null)
} catch (e: ExecutionException) {
Call.Response(false, null, Failure.ServerError())
} catch (e: InterruptedException) {
Call.Response(false, null, Failure.InterruptedError())
} catch (e: TimeoutException) {
Call.Response(false, null, Failure.TimeoutError())
}
}
Note I no longer need my Thread.sleep while loop.
This code should only be run in a background thread/kotlin coroutine.
This is overengineered, there are several layers trying to do the same thing. I suggest you go back a few steps, undo the abstractions and get into the mood of using coroutines directly. Implement a suspend fun according to this template. You don't need the crutches of Either, handle exceptions in the most natural way: a try-catch around a suspend fun call.
You should end up with a signature as follows:
suspend fun movieList(): List<MovieEntity>
Call site:
launch(UI) {
try {
val list = movieList()
...
} catch (e: FireException) {
// handle
}
}
That's is not the way how firebase works. Firebase is based on callback.
I recommend architecture component's livedata.
Please check the following example.
here is a link: https://android.jlelse.eu/android-architecture-components-with-firebase-907b7699f6a0