Having trouble with parsing one single field from JSON response after enabling minify, with minify disabled all works correctly:
retrofit API call:
#FormUrlEncoded
#POST("/api/test")
fun test(#Field <some String fields>
): Observable<Response<TestListing>>
wrapped in repo
override fun test(<some String fields>): Observable<Response<TestListing>> {
return api.test(<some String fields>)
.subscribeOn(schedulers.io())
}
model:
data class TestListing (
#Json(name = "success") val success:Int,
#Json(name = "user") val user: TestUser?
)
TestUser class
data class TestUser(
#Json(name = "id") val id: Int,
#Json(name = "email") val email: String,
#Json(name = "name") val name: String,
#Json(name = "key") val remix_userkey: String,
#Json(name = "downloads_limit") val downloads_limit: Int?,
<some other fields>
)
and finally calling it in a viewModel
fun test(<some String fields>){
compositeDisposable.add(testRepo.test(<some String variables>)
.subscribeOn(schedulers.io())
.observeOn(schedulers.main())
.subscribe ({ testList ->
testListDebug.postValue(testList)
if (testList.isSuccessful) user.postValue(userList.body()?.user)
else {<some error posting>}
})
{ throwable -> <some actions>})
}
So without minifyEnabled it parses this JSON
{"success":1,"user":{"id":"123456","email":"test#test.com","name":"Test","remix_userkey":"abcd123abcd","downloads_limit":15}}
correctly, after I enable minify - id field is always 0.
Same JSON, but somehow it wraps in retrofit Response already with id=0 in the body(all other fields are parsed correctly)
example of testListDebug value from debugger after API call
Tried adding all library rules in proguard-rules.pro file, but with no effect; also tried adding #Keep annotation to TestUser class and renaming id field
Where I can dig from here? Is it something regarding Moshi or Retrofit/Okhttp?
Figured it out - needed to keep a custom moshi annotation class, which was used for parsing some field(which sometimes Int and sometimes Boolean) in other API calls and which was not used here. After adding keep annotation to it id is parsed fine
Very strange behavior since this annotation was not used here
I have the following Kotlin class that I'm using as a Room entity
#Entity(tableName = "subscriptions")
data class Subscription(#ColumnInfo(name = "title")
var name: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "description")
var description: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "price")
var price: Float,
#ColumnInfo(name = "payment_method")
var paymentMethod: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "frequency")
var frequencyNum: Int,
#ColumnInfo(name = "interval")
#TypeConverters(FrequencyTypeConverter::class)
var frequencyType: FrequencyType,
#ColumnInfo(name = "start_date")
#TypeConverters(DateTypeConverter::class)
var startDate: Date,
#PrimaryKey(autoGenerate = true)
val id: Int = 0) : Comparable<Subscription>
however, when I build I get the following error:
private com.owenlejeune.subscriptions.model.FrequencyType frequencyType;
^/Volumes/Data/Code/HonorsProject/ModernSubscriptions/app/build/tmp/kapt3/stubs/debug/com/owenlejeune/subscriptions/model/Subscription.java:29: error: Cannot figure out how to save this field into database. You can consider adding a type converter for it.
My FrequencyType converter class looks like
class FrequencyTypeConverter {
#TypeConverter
fun fromFrequencyType(value: FrequencyType): Int = value.ordinal
#TypeConverter
fun toFrequencyType(value: Int): FrequencyType = FrequencyType.values()[value]
}
Any ideas why I'm still receiving this error?
I'm going to have to disagree with the answer from #DivijGupta, you can put the #TypeConverters annotation on entity fields and it will limit the scope of the converter to that particular field as I am sure you intended. The documentation here actually lists the usage as:
If you put it on an Entity field, only that field will be able to use it.
The error is actually to do with how Kotlin translates the annotations into Java bytecode. If you have a look at what adding an annotation to a field actually does in the decompiled code, you can see that Kotlin places it on the constructor parameter, not the field itself. Therefore as Room doesn't see an annotation on the field it gives you the error.
To fix this you have to use an extra field qualifier when annotating, in this instance:
#field:TypeConverters(FrequencyTypeConverter::class)
and you can read more about this in the Kotlin documentation on Annotation use-site targets.
Just as a side note, the answer from #DivijGupta would fix the error as the problem that I have outlined wouldn't exist, but it is just a workaround.
You need to add #TypeConverters annotation to your database class, not in the entity class.
I'm currently making my first custom Android app for a project and I can't resolve the following issue. (I made a lot of research but didn't find anything like this)
2020-02-15 11:41:30.075 10337-10337/com.example.quickmatch I/SigninFragmentViewModel: Required value 'surname' missing at $post
I'm trying to post this custom object to my backend server online :
#JsonClass(generateAdapter = true)
data class PlayerObject(
val id : Int?,
#Json(name = "surname") val surname : String,
#Json(name = "first_name") val firstName : String,
val pseudo : String,
#Json(name = "mdp") val password : String,
#Json(name = "mail_address") val mailAddress : String,
#Json(name = "phone_number") val phoneNumber : String?,
#Json(name = "scored_goals") val scoredGoals : Int,
#Json(name = "conceded_goals") val concededGoals : Int,
#Json(name = "matches_played") val matchesPlayed : Int,
val victories : Int,
val avatar : String?,
val bio : String?
)
I'm using Retrofit2 and Moshi with coroutines :
implementation "com.squareup.retrofit2:retrofit:2.5.0"
implementation "com.jakewharton.retrofit:retrofit2-kotlin-coroutines-adapter:0.9.2"
implementation "com.squareup.retrofit2:converter-moshi:2.5.0"
Here is my Retrofit instance :
/* Create Moshi object which will parse the responses */
private val moshi = Moshi.Builder()
.add(KotlinJsonAdapterFactory())
.build()
/* Retrofit builder with converter for response and base url */
private val retrofit = Retrofit.Builder()
.addConverterFactory(MoshiConverterFactory.create(moshi))
.addCallAdapterFactory(CoroutineCallAdapterFactory())
.baseUrl(BASE_URL)
.build()
To send my POST request I made this method (It should send me back the player created if successful) :
#POST("...")
fun addPlayer(#Body player: PlayerObject) : Deferred<PlayerObject>
And I call it passing this Object :
var newPlayerObject = PlayerObject(null, name, firstName, pseudo, password, mailAddress, phoneNumber, 0, 0, 0, 0, null, null )
I am getting the non-null values from EditTexts with a basic binding.editText.text.toString()
The big problem is that I logged every value (name, surname, etc...) both in my ViewModel before the request and in my UI in the button onClickListener that triggers the ViewModel and everything looks fine and matches what I type in the Edits but when the app posts it seems that every attribute of the object is set to null. Since surname is not nullable I get the previous error. I tried to make it nullable and it is the same issue with the next attributes.
Also note that passing an object with every attribute null works.
I've found specifying use-site targets helpful for fields in a Kotlin data class.
What happens if you try modifying your annotations to the following format?
#field:Json(name = "surname") val surname : String
I finally fixed this issue. The problem was created by the phone_number field which I wanted to be optional. Indeed, when the corresponding EditText was empty when posting, the value wasn't put to null but something "empty" (not just ""), that explain the parsing error. So I just added a condition to set this field at null if the EditText isn't filled.
I have the following entity:
#Entity
class Foo(
#PrimaryKey
#ColumnInfo(name = "id")
val id: Long,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing1")
val thing1: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing2")
val thing2: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing3")
val thing3: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing4")
val thing4: String
) {
#ColumnInfo(name = "local")
var local: String? = null
}
Where local is information that is not stored on the server, only local to the phone.
Currently when I pull information from the server GSON auto fills in my values, but since "local" does not come from the server it is not populate in that object.
Is there a way that when I call update I can have Room skip the update for the "local" column without writing a custom update to insert into all other columns except "local"? The pain point is that I could have many columns and each new column I add, I would have to add that to the custom insert statement.
I have also thought of a one-to-one mapping from the server entity to a new "local" entity, however now I have to deal with the pain of a join statement everywhere I get my entity since I need the local information.
I was hoping that I could do something like this:
#Entity
class Foo(
#PrimaryKey
#ColumnInfo(name = "id")
val id: Long,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing1")
val instructions: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing2")
val instructions: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing3")
val instructions: String,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing4")
val instructions: String
) {
#Ignore
var local: String? = null
}
Using the #Ignore annotation, to try and ignore the local string on a generic update. Then provide a custom update statement to just save the local info
#Query("UPDATE foo SET local = :newLocal WHERE foo.id = :id")
fun updateLocal(id: Long, newLocal: String)
However ROOM seems to be smart enough to check that I used #Ignore on the local property and it will not compile with that update statement.
Any ideas?
Partial Updates got added to Room in 2.2.0
In Dao you do the following:
// Here you specify the target entity
#Update(entity = Foo::class)
fun update(partialFoo: PartialFoo)
And along your entity Foo create a PartialFoo containing the primary key and the fields you want to update.
#Entity
class PartialFoo {
#ColumnInfo(name = "id")
val id: Long,
#ColumnInfo(name = "thing1")
val instructions: String,
}
https://stackoverflow.com/a/59834309/1724097
Simple answer is NO. Room doesn't have conditional insertion or partial insertion.
You have to come up with your insertion logic. The best one I guess is call both database and server for data and just update your server response' local value with your database response' local value.
If you are comfortable with Rx, then you can do something like this
localDb.getFoo("id")
.zipWith(
remoteServer.getFoo("id"),
BiFunction<Foo, Foo, Foo> { localFoo, remoteFoo ->
remoteFoo.local = localFoo.local
remoteFoo
}
)
Another possible way is to write custom #Query that you insert all the values except local, but it's not feasible if you have lots of fields.
I'm integrating with the Room persistence library. I have a data class in Kotlin like:
#Entity(tableName = "story")
data class Story (
#PrimaryKey val id: Long,
val by: String,
val descendants: Int,
val score: Int,
val time: Long,
val title: String,
val type: String,
val url: String
)
The #Entity and #PrimaryKey annotations are for the Room library. When I try to build, it is failing with error:
Error:Cannot find setter for field.
Error:Execution failed for task ':app:compileDebugJavaWithJavac'.
> Compilation failed; see the compiler error output for details.
I also tried providing a default constructor:
#Entity(tableName = "story")
data class Story (
#PrimaryKey val id: Long,
val by: String,
val descendants: Int,
val score: Int,
val time: Long,
val title: String,
val type: String,
val url: String
) {
constructor() : this(0, "", 0, 0, 0, "", "", "")
}
But this doesn't work as well. A thing to note is that it works if I convert this Kotlin class into a Java class with getters and setters. Any help is appreciated!
Since your fields are marked with val, they are effectively final and don't have setter fields.
Try switching out the val with var.
You might also need to initialize the fields.
#Entity(tableName = "story")
data class Story (
#PrimaryKey var id: Long? = null,
var by: String = "",
var descendants: Int = 0,
var score: Int = 0,
var time: Long = 0L,
var title: String = "",
var type: String = "",
var url: String = ""
)
EDIT
The above solution is a general fix for this error in Kotlin when using Kotlin with other Java libraries like Hibernate where i've seen this as well. If you want to keep immutability with Room, see some of the other answers which may be more specific to your case.
In some cases immutability with Java libraries is simply not working at all and while making sad developer noises, you have to switch that val for a var unfortunately.
Hey I don't know if everyone know or not, but you can not have column which is starting from is into Room.
For example you can't have like this
#Entity(tableName = "user")
data class User (
#PrimaryKey var id: Long? = null,
var userName: String = "",
var isConnectedToFB: Boolean = false,
)
If you have #Ignore field in the data class constructor you need to move it to class body like this:
#Entity(primaryKeys = ["id"])
data class User(
#field:SerializedName("id")
val id: Int,
#field:SerializedName("name")
val name: String,
#field:SerializedName("age")
val age: Int
) {
#Ignore
val testme: String?
}
All kudos go to marianperca on GitHub: https://github.com/android/architecture-components-samples/issues/421#issuecomment-442763610
There is an issue in room db library java code generation.
I was using optional field isFavorite. It gives me same error then I change my field name to favorite then compiled.
before
var isFavorite: Int? = 0,
after changing working fine
var favorite: Int? = 0,
Thanks
According to https://stackoverflow.com/a/46753804/2914140 if you have an autogenerated primary key, you should write so:
#Entity(tableName = "story")
data class Story (
val by: String,
val descendants: Int,
val score: Int,
val time: Long,
val title: String,
val type: String,
val url: String
) {
#PrimaryKey(autoGenerate = true)
var id: Int = 0
}
Note that #PrimaryKey is written inside the class body and contains modifier var.
If you later want to update a row in a database with different parameters, use these lines:
val newStory = story.copy(by = "new author", title = "new title") // Cannot use "id" in object cloning
newStory.id = story.id
dao.update(newStory)
UPDATE
I still don't use AndroidX, and Room is 'android.arch.persistence.room:runtime:1.1.1'.
You can extend this class from Serializable. But if you want to extend it from Parcelable, you will get a warning (over id variable): Property would not be serialized inro a 'Parcel'. Add '#IgnoredOnParcel' annotation to remove this warning:
Then I moved an id from the body to the constructor. In Kotlin I use #Parcelize to create Parcelable classes:
#Parcelize
#Entity(tableName = "story")
data class Story (
#PrimaryKey(autoGenerate = true)
var id: Int = 0,
val by: String,
val descendants: Int,
val score: Int,
val time: Long,
val title: String,
val type: String,
val url: String
) : Parcelable
Had this error in Java.
You cannot have a column starting with is or is_ in Java.
Try renaming the column.
Another solution:
You either have to pass the field in the constructor and initialize it with the constructor argument, or create a setter for it.
Example:
public MyEntity(String name, ...) {
this.name = name;
...
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
This error will be thrown if your column starts with Is:
#ColumnInfo(name = "IsHandicapLeague")
#NonNull
var isHandicapLeague: String = "Y"
Add a default set() function to eliminate
fun setIsHandicapLeague(flag:String) {
isHandicapLeague = flag
}
Just make the variables mutable, change val into var for Kotlin, Or private into public for Java
This is a bug and is fixed in Room 2.1.0-alpha01
https://developer.android.com/jetpack/docs/release-notes#october_8_2018
Bug Fixes
Room will now properly use Kotlin’s primary constructor in
data classes avoiding the need to declare the fields as vars.
b/105769985
I've found that another cause of this compilation error can be due to the use of the Room's #Ignore annotation on fields of your entity data class:
#Entity(tableName = "foo")
data class Foo(
// Okay
#PrimaryKey
val id: String,
// Okay
val bar: String,
// Annotation causes compilation error, all fields of data class report
// the "Cannot find setter for field" error when Ignore is present
#Ignore
val causeserror: String
)
The same error also seems to happens when using the #Transient annotation.
I've noticed this issue using version 2.2.2 of Room:
// build.gradle file
dependencies {
...
kapt "androidx.room:room-compiler:2.2.2"
...
}
Hope that helps someone!
You can try to rename id variable to another name. It worked for me ;
var id: Long? = null
to
var workerId: Long? = null
If you have to name as id and you are using retrofit, then you may need to add SerializedName("id")
Another cause of this may be the naming of the field. If you use any of the pre-defined keywords, you will get the same error.
For instance, you can not name your column "is_active".
Reference: http://www.sqlite.org/lang_keywords.html
It seems like Room and Kotlin versions need to be matched. I have same issue with Room 2.3.0 and Kotlin 1.6.10 but it's ok with Kotlin 1.5.20. It looks ok after I updated Room to 2.4.2.
https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-45883
Also there is a possible solution to use #JvmOverloads constructor for better Java compability.
Updating Room library to the latest version 2.4.2 solve the issue
The correct way to fix this issue would be simply updating to Room v2.4.3 or higher.
Workaround
If you're running on an older version of Room, one that uses an old version of the kotlinx-metadata-jvm library which doesn't understand 1.5.x metadata, a simple workaround would be adding the following line to your build.gradle:
kapt "org.jetbrains.kotlinx:kotlinx-metadata-jvm:0.5.0"
Source: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-45883/KAPT-Cannot-find-setter-for-field-compiling-projects-with-Room-db-breaks-using-150-M2
Just an update if somebody comes across this thread in 2019, after spending hours digging online on why this should work, but it doesn't.
Using val works as expected if you are using the AndroidX version ( androidx.room:room-<any>:2.*) but it doesn't when using the old android.arch.persistence.room:<any>:1.1.1 and it seems that version 2.* wasn't released on this latter repo.
Edit: typos
If you want the val immutability available for your entity, it is possible.
You should update to AndroidX room current version.
Check for the related issue here it is marked as Won't Fix
Now they have release a fix related to the issue with version 2.0.0-beta01
Now you can use immutable val with default value e.g:
#Entity("tbl_abc")
data class Abc(
#PrimaryKey
val id: Int = 0,
val isFavourite: Boolean = false
)
Previously, the above snippet will throw an error of Cannot find setter for field. Changing into var is a great workaround, but I prefer for the entity class to be immutable from outside invocation
You can now start your field with is but you can't have a number next to the is like : is2FooSelected, you have to rename to isTwoFooSelected.
I think that the variable we wrote as id is getting mixed up with the id in the system. Therefore, when I define it as uuid, my error is resolved. I think it will be solved too. Also, try using var instead of val.
#PrimaryKey(autoGenerate = true)
var uuid:Int=0
Just use var instead of val and if you are using private keyword, make it public.
#Entity(tableName = "story")
data class Story (
#PrimaryKey val id: Long,
var by: String,
var descendants: Int,
var score: Int,
var time: Long,
var title: String,
var type: String,
var url: String
)