I'm wondering what is a good/best practice to deal with ViewModels and multiple Activities referring to a specific piece of data in my database.
Assuming I have a FriendViewModel which provides access to my friend_database (throught a Repository and a Dao of course) and a RecyclerView displaying all FriendEntities.
If I now want to edit a friend in a different Activity: is it better (or more efficient) to pass one or more FriendEntities (implementing Serializable) to the intent, or should I rather pass the friendId + FriendViewModel and retrieve the FriendEntity from the friend_database using the passed FriendViewModel and friendId?
As this seems to be a common scenario: is there a best practice for that situation?
We usually have separate ViewModels for different Activities/Fragments unless we have common data we want to handle and that's where SharedViewModel comes into play. In your situation, I don't see using a ShareViewModel necessary at all.
FirstActivity:
ListActivity -> ListViewModel -> FriendRepository -> FriendDao
SecondActivity
EditActivity -> EditViewModel -> FriendRepository -> FriendDao
So the only things shared here are your Repository and FriendDao which wraps around Friend model.
Pass friend id from ListActivity to EditActivity, ask FriendRepository to retrieve that friend by using DAO.
That's the approach I personally use and most of the samples out there will use.
Related
I'm very new to android development and struggling to find this answer. Is it possible to share the same instance of a data class across all my view models?
Currently when my app first starts, I'm fetching my user's app preferences from a Firestore DB and instantiating a data class instance I have defined to hold all user preferences. I want to have all my view models to have access to the user preferences without every view model having to make the Firestore DB call and creating its own data class instance. Is it possible to share the same instance of a data class between all of my view models?
I could use dagger hilt to to fetch the preferences from Firestore, create my data class instance, and provide that as a dependency of injection....but if a user updates their preferences after loading the app then those updates won't reflect in the data class instance that is injected via dagger hilt, correct?
Admittedly I might be going about this the wrong way. I'm ultimately trying to understand what the best way to share my app preferences that are stored in an external DB to all of my view models.
After getting the data in your viewModel , initialize the related viewmodel in your fragment as activityViewModel as below;
val shareViewModel by activityViewModels<ShareViewModel>()
If you use it in your activity just set this for owner parameter as below;
val shareViewModel = ViewModelProvider(this)[ShareViewModel::class.java]
It provides you sharing data across your app
Moreover, check this codelab https://developer.android.com/codelabs/basic-android-kotlin-training-shared-viewmodel
Preamble
In trying to get my head around the Kotlin classes to implement Android's ViewModel (and MVVM pattern) as used with Fragments and Activities, it is not clear to me of the trade-offs among the various complex classes especially how they have inherited implicit operations and visible methods (e.g., from the observer objects, managed scope, etc.) versus the old O-O approach of passing list-items and lists between activities in an intent as a bundle or reference, etc.
To illustrate my learning dilemma, I am implementing a crunchy cookie and and a jar to contain the cookies. The cookies can be created, consumed and viewed inside the cookie jar.
Android code tends to be vague on details of classes and the tutorials use deprecated versions, so it is difficult to follow best-practices with the latest version of the Android Architecture Component libraries.
Pseudo Kotlin code:
data class CrunchieCookie : {
var flavor: String?
var calories: String?
var photo: ImageView?
}
class CrunchieCookieViewModel : ViewModel() {
val _crunchieCookie: CrunchieCookie?
val crunchieCookie: CrunchieCookie = _crunchieCookie
}
class CookieJarListViewModel: ViewModel() {
val _cookieJar: MutableLiveData<CrunchieCookie>?
val cookieJar: LiveData<CrunchieCookie> = _cookieJar
}
Purpose
I am expecting to create, update and destroy crunchie-cookies
I am expecting to put crunchie-cookies in a cookie-jar (and take them out)
I am expecting to list all the crunchie-cookies in the cookie-jar in a scrolling ListView
I am expecting to click on a crunchie-cooking in the cookie-jar to open an detail view of the cookie
Finally, storing the cookie-jar in a remote DB, so planning for the local/remote data-source in the future
So, to my way of thinking, the cookie viewmodel will be used in CRUD operations and reused in the detail view from the list model.
MAKING #Tenfour04 's COMMENT AN ANSWER.
Your ViewModel should have a LiveData<List>. The Fragment containing the ListView should observe the LiveData for changes and pass the List along to the ListView when the LiveData value changes. If you're actually just modifying the contents of a MutableList, then you need to set the value of the MutableLiveData to that same list to inform it that there's a change it needs to notify observers about. – Tenfour04 Sep 9 at 0:02
From official we know
The ViewModel class is designed to store and manage UI-related data in a lifecycle conscious way
But i think lot of developers use ViewModel as both data store and controller(like calling repository, network client for data). I also use as for both data store and controller for view.
Android official sample code has also some controller logic. From official :
class MyViewModel : ViewModel() {
private val users: MutableLiveData<List<User>> by lazy {
MutableLiveData().also {
loadUsers()
}
}
fun getUsers(): LiveData<List<User>> {
return users
}
private fun loadUsers() {
// Do an asynchronous operation to fetch users.
}
}
Here loadUsers may calling some Repository or NetworkClient . So here it acting like controller.
I am sure many developer do this way, but as from definition ViewModel should store and manage UI related data, should ViewModel act as a Controller ?
I found some stackoverflow thread this and this about this.
First one accepted answer suggested not to use use ViewModel as Controller and to use a Controller for other task.
In comment section of Second one #commonsware also suggested not to use complicated things other than data.
So my question is
What will be the actual responsibility of ViewModel from architectural concept?
If i have to do some method calls related to View [like data query, network call and other business login related stuff ] where should i do it?
and if i have to use a Controller then how i connect View and Controller for device rotation and sharing controller between Fragment ?
Hope my question is clear to all
Thanks in advance.
Here loadUsers() may calling some Repository or NetworkClient . So here it acting like controller.
I am sure many developer do this way, but as from definition ViewModel should store and manage UI related data, should ViewModel act as a Controller ?
Theoretically, the retrieval of data should be internal to the LiveData, triggered by having active observers and based on that, deciding what to do (in onActive()). If the LiveData is actually a MediatorLiveData, then this also applies to any block bound with addSource, as the block added with addSource of a MediatorLiveData is only called when the MediatorLiveData is observed by an active observer
You can see this technique used to its fullest in the NetworkBoundResource. The ViewModel only stores data, and knows nothing of data loading.
What will be the actual responsibility of ViewModel from architectural concept?
If you see the comments by Yigit Boyar (creator of ViewModel):
I'm the guy (or part of the team) that added it and it had nothing to do w/ MVVM. It is all about trying to give a class to people where they should put the data.
AAC is not an MVVM implementation, nor VM concept only lives as part of MVVM.
In fact, the main motivation for this was; we've been telling devs not to manage data in the UI controller and the answers was also, so where? And ViewModel became that answer.
We want it to be the model for your view layer (fragment, activity whatever). On the hindsight, it could be better to pick a name that is new but naming is really hard.
In conclusion: ViewModel is the Model in an MVC scenario, where C is the Activity or Fragment, V is the inflated view, and M is the ViewModel.
If i have to do some method calls related to View [like data query, network call and other business login related stuff ] where should i do it?
ViewModel gets the data in the form of a LiveData, and the LiveData is "activated" by observing it from the View with a given lifecycle.
Network calls are supposed to be also triggered in the same manner (if you follow the approach as per LiveData was designed).
In theory, if you have a login call, you could as well do it in the controller instead of the model, so you could do it in the Fragment, even though there are tricks like Jetpack Databinding that would let you call methods from the View on the Model directly from the XML.
and if i have to use a Controller then how i connect View and Controller for device rotation and sharing controller between Fragment ?
ViewModel exposes LiveData and can potentially also expose LiveEvent if you write the necessary code for that (unfortunately that is not provided by the Jetpack team, and neither are Command bindings), and either the View or the Controller can call methods directly on it if necessary. ViewModel is stored across config changes (not across process death, ofc) so it should not hold a direct view reference.
I am learning Android Architecture Components.
For exemple, and be more easier to understand, If i want to build a TO DO LIST app, my item creation DAO should be
#Dao
public interface ItemDao {
#Insert
long insertItem(Item item);
}
and my viewModel could be use this DAO to insert an item in my TODO list.
But, in architecture component, it is recommanded to NOT manipulate the database by the viewmodel but by the repository.
So, the code should be like that
public class ItemDataRepository {
private final ItemDao itemDao;
public ItemDataRepository(ItemDao itemDao) { this.itemDao = itemDao; }
// --- CREATE ---
public void createItem(Item item){ itemDao.insertItem(item); }
It seems redundant when we cannot understand why.
My question is : why?
I use the Repository for a couple of reasons:
Separation of concern I let the repo be responsible for downloading and storing all the data. That way the ViewModel doesn't have to know any specifics about where the data is coming from, e.g. if it's from an API or a cache. It also makes it easier to write Unit tests for the ViewModel, since all the database and API logic should already be tested in Unit tests for the Repository.
Reusability Lets say you fetch the data from an API and store in a database. If you put the code in the ViewModel and then want to perform the same actions from another place in the app, you need to copy paste the code. By having it in a Repository you can easily share the implementation.
Share data If you have multiple screens that show parts of the same data set, having one Repository passed around between the screens make it easy to share the data. No more trying to pass large amount of data in Bundle and Intent.
Lifecycle Let's say you download data from an API to show in your view. If you fetch the data in the ViewModel you will have to re-download it when the screen is closed and re-opened, since the ViewModel is discarded. However if you store it in the Repository it can use the Application lifecycle, so when you revisit the screen again, the data is already in the cache.
Most of the MVVM examples are dealing with very simple user interfaces.
But lets say I have an activity with many views to update (i.e. lots of data)
As I read in other places, multiple ViewModel objects is a bad pattern.
So, as I see it there are two solutions for that:
Create a single object (and single LiveData for it), that wraps all other data objects.
But there's a problem with this - each data object that gets updated will cause the whole UI to update.
Create multiple objects (and multiple LiveData objects for it).
It means that I need to observe each LiveData object. Is there a problem with this pattern?
Thanks in Advance!
First Point you mentioned : Yes this is not optimal Pattern to do but if you have small data then, separating LiveDatas is more work for less gains
Second Point you mentioned : Yes this is more optimal, you can have a LiveData object for each View you want to update and observe them all from your activity or fragment. There are no issues in this Pattern.
About Mutilple ViewModels :
Multiple ViewModels Pattern in same Activty/Fragment is also an option if you have too many things(LiveData objects or funcitions) happening in one ViewModel. This is only recommended to make viewModels lighter. So only use this if you are having a large viewModel class
Create ViewModels for discrete types of information.
You could for example have a UserViewModel that deals with all state regarding a User. This means you can use the same ViewModel in another context, without pulling data that might not be necessary (as you would if you had a single God ViewModel).
Create as many LiveData objects as you need to model your view.
It is better to condense the data into logical objects, where possible. If only to keep things manageable.
If you have a User, you should use that for your LiveData instead of having a LiveData for E-mail address, Display name, Age, etc. That will make things much simpler for your data bindings. Try to keep things logically grouped together.