I want to reference an object within this class I have below:
class HerbData {
object Dill {
const val herbName: String = "This is Dill!"
const val scientificName: String = "Anethum Graveolens"
val dullThumbnail: Int = R.drawable.dill_thumbnail_attr
}
object Peppermint {
val herbName: String = "This is Peppermint!"
}
}
Is there anyway that I can reference the object by using a string in Kotlin? Here is somewhat what I mean:
HerbData."Dill".herbname
I can't find anything on this topic for Kotlin.
Another way you could do this is with an enum class. The advantage over a map is that you have a data structure you can reference directly in code, so you could use HerbData.Dill as well as HerbData["Dill"]. And that will enable you to take advantage of compile-time checking and lint warnings, refactoring, exhaustive pattern matching, code completion etc, because the data is defined in your code
enum class HerbData(
val herbName: String,
val scientificName: String? = null,
val dullThumbnail: Int? = null
) {
Dill("This is Dill!", "Anethum Graveolens", R.drawable.dill_thumbnail_attr),
Peppermint("This is Peppermint!");
companion object {
operator fun get(name: String): HerbData? =
try { valueOf(name) } catch(e: IllegalArgumentException) { null }
}
}
fun main() {
// no guarantee these lookups exist, need to null-check them
HerbData["Peppermint"]?.herbName.run(::println)
// case-sensitive so this fails
HerbData["peppermint"]?.herbName.run(::println)
// this name is defined in the type system though! No checking required
HerbData.Peppermint.herbName.run(::println)
}
>> This is Peppermint!
null
This is Peppermint!
Enum classes have that valueOf(String) method that lets you look up a constant by name, but it throws an exception if nothing matches. I added it as a get operator function on the class, so you can use the typical getter access like a map (e.g. HerbData["Dill"]). As an alternative, you could do something a bit neater:
companion object {
// storing all the enum constants for lookups
private val values = values()
operator fun get(name: String): HerbData? =
values.find() { it.name.equals(name, ignoreCase = true) }
}
You could tweak the efficiency on this (I'm just storing the result of values() since that call creates a new array each time) but it's pretty simple - you're just storing all the enum entries and creating a lookup based on the name. That lets you be a little smarter if you need to, like making the lookup case-insensitive (which may or may not be a good thing, depending on why you're doing this)
The advantage here is that you're generating the lookup automatically - if you ever refactor the name of an enum constant, the string label will always match it (which you can get from the enum constant itself using its name property). Any "Dill" strings in your code will stay as "Dill" of course - that's the limitation of using hardcoded string lookups
The question really is, why do you want to do this? If it's pure data where no items need to be explicitly referenced in code, and it's all looked up at runtime, you should probably use a data class and a map, or something along those lines. If you do need to reference them as objects within the code at compile time (and trying to use HerbData."Dill".herbName implies you do) then an enum is a fairly easy way to let you do both
Declare a Data Class
data class HerbData (
val scientificName: String,
val dullThumbnail: Int
)
Initialize a muteable map and put data in it
val herbData = mutableMapOf<String, HerbData>()
herbData.put("Dill", HerbData("Anethum Graveolens", R.drawable.dill_thumbnail_attr))
herbData.put("Peppermint", HerbData("Mentha piperita", R.drawable.peppermint_thumbnail_attr))
You can now just
herbData["Dill"]?.scientificName
class HerbData {
interface Herb {
val herbName: String
val scientificName: String
}
object Dill : Herb {
override val herbName: String = "This is Dill!"
override val scientificName: String = "Anethum Graveolens"
}
object Peppermint: Herb {
override val herbName: String = "This is Peppermint!"
override val scientificName: String = "Mentha piperita"
}
companion object {
operator fun get(name: String): Herb? {
return HerbData::class
.nestedClasses
.find { it.simpleName == name }
?.objectInstance as? Herb
}
}
}
println(HerbData["Dill"]?.herbName) // Prints: This is Dill!
println(HerbData["Peppermint"]?.scientificName) // Prints: Mentha piperita
println(HerbData["Pepper"]?.herbName) // Prints: null
Related
The problem starts with getParcelableArrayListExtra doesn't support type check when we try to set it to a variable. Let me give an example as basic as I can.
A User Class.
import kotlinx.parcelize.Parcelize
import android.os.Parcelable
#Parcelize
data class UserClass(
var name: String? = null,
var text: String? = null,
var age: Int? = null
) : Parcelable
The random class which we'll try to set to the User variable.
import android.os.Parcelable
import kotlinx.parcelize.Parcelize
#Parcelize
data class MessageClass(
val title: String?, = Constant.STRING_EMPTY
val text: String? = Constant.STRING_EMPTY
) : Parcelable
The class that fills intent
class FillIntentClass(){
//Let's say one of the developers added the MessageClass object inside our intent.
//Or BE sent the wrong type of object and I passed its value to the intent.
private fun DummyFunctionToSetIntent(){
val messageList = arraylistOf(MessageClass(title = "hello",text ="dummy text")
intent.putParcelableArrayListExtra(EXTRA_PAYMENT_OPTIONS_EXTRA, messageList)
}
}
Test class
class MyTestClass(){
// UserList variable
private var mUserList: ArrayList<UserClass>? = null
override fun onCreate(savedInstanceState: Bundle?) {
...
with(intent) {
// In this situation, mUserList became the type of ArrayList<MessageClass>
// But it shouldn't be possible. Because it must accept only ArrayList<UserClass>
// And that causes mostly crashes when the other code parts use it.
mUserList = getParcelableArrayListExtra(EXTRA_PAYMENT_OPTIONS_EXTRA)
// mUserList now pretend its like ArrayList<MessageClass>. But i set it as ArrayList<UserClass> at the top of the class.
// The best way to solve this is to type check with as?. If the type is not as expected it must return null.
// But I cannot use type check here. It gives me a "Not enough information to infer type variable T" error.
mUserList = getParcelableArrayListExtra(EXTRA_PAYMENT_OPTIONS_EXTRA) as? ArrayList<UserClass> //(compile error here on IDE)
// So I had to come out with the below solution. But I cannot say it's the best practice.
if (getParcelableArrayListExtra<UserClass>(EXTRA_PAYMENT_OPTIONS_EXTRA)
?.filterIsInstance<UserClass>()?.isNotEmpty() == true
) {
mUserList = getParcelableArrayListExtra(EXTRA_PAYMENT_OPTIONS_EXTRA)
}
}
}
}
Type check(as,as?) works with getParcelable functions as expected. But when it comes to the getParcelableArrayListExtra it just doesn't work and gives compile error as I explained above.
Do you have any knowledge of what's the best option for as, as? check? And how it's possible for mUserList to accept a different type of Array and pretend like it?
This is a mess for a few reasons:
You are coding in Kotlin, but the classes you are dealing with (Parcelable, Bundle, Intent, ArrayList) are actually Java
Generics in Java are a hack
I would split the problem into 2 parts:
Unparcel the ArrayList into ArrayList<Parcelable>
Check/convert the contents of the ArrayList<Parcelable> into the expected type
Check the API level and code accordingly:
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= 33) {
data = intent.getParcelableExtra (String name, Class<T> clazz)
}else{
data = intent.getParcelableExtra("data")
}
Also you can use these extensions for bundle and intent:
inline fun <reified T : Parcelable> Intent.parcelable(key: String): T? = when {
SDK_INT >= 33 -> getParcelableExtra(key, T::class.java)
else -> #Suppress("DEPRECATION") getParcelableExtra(key) as? T
}
inline fun <reified T : Parcelable> Bundle.parcelable(key: String): T? = when {
SDK_INT >= 33 -> getParcelable(key, T::class.java)
else -> #Suppress("DEPRECATION") getParcelable(key) as? T
}
I downloaded a project and I'm not really sure what exactly the following line does:
val (episode, setEpisode) = remember { mutableStateOf<EpisodeDetail?>(null) }
The only thing I don't get is why there are two names after the "val" word.
I tried to google for it but I really don't know the name of the syntax.
It's called a Destructuring Declaration
https://kotlinlang.org/docs/destructuring-declarations.html
You may have seen something similar in JavaScript when you have an object, and you can extract the keys to variables with the following
const { key1, key2 } = { key1:"first", key2:"second", ignored:"third" };
console.log(key1, key2) // first second
If you have a data class Kotlin will create the component<N> functions for you.
class MyClass (val myStr: String, val myInt: Int, val myBool: Boolean) {
operator fun component1(): String = myStr
operator fun component2(): Int = myInt
operator fun component3(): Boolean = myBool
}
fun main() {
val x = MyClass("Hello", 5, false)
val (y, _, z) = x // use _ to ignore values you don't need
println(y) // Hello
println(z) // false
}
Unlike Javascript which uses the key names, Kotlin data classes use field ordering (by defining your own component<N> functions you could swap the order of destructuring).
I have a function filter here
fun filter(category: String) {
...
}
and a Class with many constant string
object Constants {
val CAT_SPORT = "CAT_SPORT"
val CAT_CAR = "CAT_CAR"
...
}
How to ensure the parameter category is a constant string from Constants (or throw warning)?
I am looking for something like #StringRes.
I know Enum may do the trick but prefer not to code refactor at this moment.
Using androidx.annotation you can do something like this:
object Constants {
#Retention(AnnotationRetention.SOURCE)
#StringDef(CAT_SPORT, CAT_CAR)
annotation class Category
const val CAT_SPORT = "CAT_SPORT"
const val CAT_CAR = "CAT_CAR"
}
fun filter(#Constants.Category category: String) {
...
}
I am using Moshi to deserialize json from our server but I have come across an issue I’m sure has a solution, I just can’t see it. Over the socket, we are send json that, at the top level, has three fields:
{
"data_type": "<actual_data_type>",
"data_id": "<actual_data_id>",
"data": <data_object>
}
The issue is that the data can actually be several different objects based on what data_type is can I’m not sure how to pass that information into the adaptor for Data. I’ve tried a couple different things, but it just gets closer and closer to me parsing the whole thing myself, which seems to defeat the point. Is there a way to pass information from one adaptor to another?
For anyone who wants to do something similar, I took the basic shape of a generic factory from here: https://github.com/square/moshi/pull/264/files (which also what #eric cochran is recommending in his comment) and made it more specific to fit my exact case.
class EventResponseAdapterFactory : JsonAdapter.Factory {
private val labelKey = "data_type"
private val subtypeToLabel = hashMapOf<String, Class<out BaseData>>(
DataType.CURRENT_POWER.toString() to CurrentPower::class.java,
DataType.DEVICE_STATUS_CHANGED.toString() to DeviceStatus::class.java,
DataType.EPISODE_EVENT.toString() to EpisodeEvent::class.java,
DataType.APPLIANCE_INSTANCE_UPDATED.toString() to ApplianceInstanceUpdated::class.java,
DataType.RECURRING_PATTERNS.toString() to RecurringPatternOccurrence::class.java,
DataType.RECURRING_PATTERN_UPDATED.toString() to RecurringPatternUpdated::class.java
)
override fun create(type: Type, annotations: Set<Annotation>, moshi: Moshi): JsonAdapter<*>? {
if (!annotations.isEmpty() || type != EventResponse::class.java) {
return null
}
val size = subtypeToLabel.size
val labelToDelegate = LinkedHashMap<String, JsonAdapter<EventResponse<BaseData>>>(size)
for (entry in subtypeToLabel.entries) {
val key = entry.key
val value = entry.value
val parameterizedType = Types.newParameterizedType(EventResponse::class.java, value)
val delegate = moshi.adapter<EventResponse<BaseData>>(parameterizedType, annotations)
labelToDelegate.put(key, delegate)
}
return EventResponseAdapter(
labelKey,
labelToDelegate
)
}
private class EventResponseAdapter internal constructor(
private val labelKey: String,
private val labelToDelegate: LinkedHashMap<String, JsonAdapter<EventResponse<BaseData>>>
) : JsonAdapter<EventResponse<BaseData>>() {
override fun fromJson(reader: JsonReader): EventResponse<BaseData>? {
val raw = reader.readJsonValue()
if (raw !is Map<*, *>) {
throw JsonDataException("Value must be a JSON object but had a value of $raw of type ${raw?.javaClass}")
}
val label = raw.get(labelKey) ?: throw JsonDataException("Missing label for $labelKey")
if (label !is String) {
throw JsonDataException("Label for $labelKey must be a string but had a value of $label of type ${label.javaClass}")
}
val delegate = labelToDelegate[label] ?: return null
return delegate.fromJsonValue(raw)
}
// Not used
override fun toJson(writer: JsonWriter, value: EventResponse<BaseData>?) {}
}
}
The only thing to watch out for is that the RuntimeJsonAdapterFactory in the link uses Types.getRawType(type) to get the type with the generics stripped away. We, of course, don't want that because once the specific generic type has been found, we want the normal Moshi adapters to kick in and do the proper parsing for us.
Right code:
class MainActHandler(val weakActivity: WeakReference<Activity>): Handler() {
override fun handleMessage(msg: Message?) {
val trueAct = weakActivity.get() ?: return
if (msg?.what == ConversationMgr.MSG_WHAT_NEW_SENTENCE){
val sentence = msg.obj as String?
trueAct.conversation.text = sentence
}
super.handleMessage(msg)
}
}
cannot be resolved code:
class MainActHandler(weakActivity: WeakReference<Activity>): Handler() {
override fun handleMessage(msg: Message?) {
val trueAct = weakActivity.get() ?: return
if (msg?.what == ConversationMgr.MSG_WHAT_NEW_SENTENCE){
val sentence = msg.obj as String?
trueAct.conversation.text = sentence
}
super.handleMessage(msg)
}
}
cannot be resolved code screenshot
The only difference is the "val" has been deleted and cannot be resolve.
Which might be important is that it's a inner class.
BUT
This one class without "val/var" in constructor parameter is working:
class BookInfo(convrMgr: ConversationMgr, id: String, queue: RequestQueue, queueTag:String) {
val TAG = "BookInfo"
var title: String? = ""
init {
val url = "https://api.douban.com/v2/book/$id"
// Request a string response from the provided URL.
val stringRequest = StringRequest(Request.Method.GET, url,
Response.Listener<String> { response ->
Log.d(TAG + " Response", response.substring(0))
// Parse JSON from String value
val parser = Parser()
val jsonObj: JsonObject =
parser.parse(StringBuilder(response.substring(0))) as JsonObject
// Initial book title of book properties.
title = jsonObj.string("title")
Log.d(TAG + " Book title", title)
convrMgr.addNewMsg(title)
},
Response.ErrorListener { error -> Log.e(TAG + " Error", error.toString()) })
// Set the tag on the request.
stringRequest.tag = queueTag
// Add the request to the RequestQueue.
queue.add(stringRequest)
}
}
And if I add var/val before "queue: RequestQueue", I'll get suggestion:
"Constructor parameter is never used as a property less. This inspection reports primary constructor parameters that can have 'val' or 'var' removed. Unnecessary usage of 'val' and 'var' in primary constructor consumes unnecessary memory."
I am just confused about it.
When you write val/var within the constructor, it declares a property inside the class. When you do not write it, it is simply a parameter passed to the primary constructor, where you can access the parameters within the init block or use it to initialize other properties. For example,
class User(val id: Long, email: String) {
val hasEmail = email.isNotBlank() //email can be accessed here
init {
//email can be accessed here
}
fun getEmail(){
//email can't be accessed here
}
}
Constructor parameter is never used as a property
This suggestion is saying that you do not use this property in place apart from the initialization. So, it suggests you to remove this property from the class.
Constructor parameters must use var or val when they are used as a property elsewhere in the class. They do not need to be properties if they are only used for class initialization.
In the example below, the parameter must be a property (var or val) because it is used in a method:
class A(val number: Int) {
fun foo() = number
}
In this other example, the parameter is only used to initialize the class, so it does not need to be a property:
class B(number: Int): A(number) {
init {
System.out.println("number: $number")
}
}
This might be a late answer but the magic lies under the hood:
Based on #BakaWaii's answer:
Putting var/val will make the variable a property of the class and not putting it will make it a parameter of only the constructor function.
So what does it mean, to understand lets look into some code:
class Test(a: Int){}
Now Lets see the decompiled java code:
public final class Test {
public Test(int a) {
}
}
So now if I try to access a using the object of Test() like the below code:
Test t = new Test(10);
t.a //Error
It will give me error. Unresolved reference: a. Why because a is a parameter of the constructor only.
Now if we put var/val in the paramater like below:
class Test(var a: Int){}
The decompliked Java code will become:
public final class Test {
private int a;
public final int getA() {
return this.a;
}
public final void setA(int var1) {
this.a = var1;
}
public Test(int a) {
this.a = a;
}
}
Thus it will not only give you a class property but also give you getter/setters for setting the values.
Now the next question arises if the field a is private how can it be accessed. Simple answer in Java you cannot, i.e. if you are calling the KT class from a Java you will not be able to assign value of a like Test(1).a = 10 but will have to use Test(1).setA(5).
But as kotlin internally handles getters/setters Test(1).a = 5 will be ok.
For #Parcelize to work you need to open up the super's properties and override them in the child:
abstract class Goal(open var number: Int, open var name: String) : Parcelable
#Parcelize
class OperationalGoal(override var number: Int, override var name: String, var description: String) : Goal(number, name)```
In very simple terms, use var or val in class constructor parameters when you want to use that variable, say, inside a method within that class. Thus you're effectively turning them into properties and not just mere constructor or method parameters.
class User(var name: String, age: Int) {
var str = "John"
var num = 18
fun setName(){
name = str // due to using var on our class constructor parameter, we can access the constructor variable *name* inside this setter method. *name* is a property parameter thanks to the var keyword.
}
fun setAge(){
age = num // this will result in a compiler error, because *age* is just a parameter, notice that var wasn't used in the *age* parameter within the class constructor, which means we can't access it like we did with *name*
}
}
Run this Kotlin Playground code to get a clearer idea of what's going on.