Develop Reference

How to cancel a combine of flows when one of them emits a certain value?

I am doing multiple network requests in parallel and monitoring the result using a Stateflow.
Each network request is done in a separate flow, and I use combine to push the latest status on my Stateflow. Here's my code:
Repo class:
fun networkRequest1(id: Int): Flow<Resource<List<Area>>> =
flow {
emit(Resource.Loading())
try {
val areas = retrofitInterface.getAreas(id)
emit(Resource.Success(areas))
} catch (throwable: Throwable) {
emit(
Resource.Error()
)
)
}
}
fun networkRequest2(id: Int): Flow<Resource<List<Area>>> = //same code as above for simplicity
fun networkRequest3(id: Int): Flow<Resource<List<Area>>> = //same code as above for simplicity
fun networkRequest4(id: Int): Flow<Resource<List<Area>>> = //same code as above for simplicity
ViewModel class:
val getDataCombinedStateFlow: StateFlow<Resource<HashMap<String, Resource<out List<Any>>>>?> =
getDataTrigger.flatMapLatest {
withContext(it) {
combine(
repo.networkRequest1(id: Int),
repo.networkRequest2(id: Int),
repo.networkRequest3(id: Int),
repo.networkRequest4(id: Int)
) { a,
b,
c,
d
->
hashMapOf(
Pair("1", a),
Pair("2",b),
Pair("3", c),
Pair("4", d),
)
}.flatMapLatest {
val progress = it
var isLoading = false
flow<Resource<HashMap<String, Resource<out List<Any>>>>?> {
emit(Resource.Loading())
progress.forEach { (t, u) ->
if (u is Resource.Error) {
emit(Resource.Error(error = u.error!!))
// I want to cancel here, as I no longer care if 1 request fails
return#flow
}
if (u is Resource.Loading) {
isLoading = true
}
}
if (isLoading) {
emit(Resource.Loading())
return#flow
}
if (!isLoading) {
emit(Resource.Success(progress))
}
}
}
}
}.stateIn(viewModelScope, SharingStarted.Lazily, null)
View class:
viewLifecycleOwner.lifecycleScope.launchWhenCreated() {
viewModel.getDataCombinedStateFlow.collect {
val result = it ?: return#collect
binding.loadingErrorState.apply {
if (result is Resource.Loading) {
//show smth
}
if (result is Resource.Error) {
//show error msg
}
if (result is Resource.Success) {
//done
}
}
}
}
I want to be able to cancel all work after a Resource.Error is emitted, as I no longer want to wait or do any related work for the response of other API calls in case one of them fails.
How can I achieve that?
I tried to cancel the collect, but the flows that build the Stateflow keep working and emmit results. I know that they won't be collected but still, I find this a waste of resources.

I think this whole situation is complicated by the fact that you have source flows just to precede what would otherwise be suspend functions with a Loading state. So then you're having to merge them and filter out various loading states, and your end result flow keeps repeatedly emitting a loading state until all the sources are ready.
If you instead have basic suspend functions for your network operations, for example:
suspend fun networkRequest1(id: Int): List<Area> =
retrofitInterface.getAreas(id)
Then your view model flow becomes simpler. It doesn't make sense to use a specific context just to call a flow builder function, so I left that part out. (I'm also confused as to why you have a flow of CoroutineContexts.)
I also think it's much cleaner if you break out the request call into a separate function.
private fun makeParallelRequests(id: Int): Map<String, Resource<out List<Any>> = coroutineScope {
val results = listOf(
async { networkRequest1(id) },
async { networkRequest2(id) },
async { networkRequest2(id) },
async { networkRequest4(id) }
).awaitAll()
.map { Resource.Success(it) }
listOf("1", "2", "3", "4").zip(results).toMap()
}
val dataCombinedStateFlow: StateFlow<Resource<Map<String, Resource<out List<Any>>>>?> =
getDataTrigger.flatMapLatest {
flow {
emit(Resource.Loading())
try {
val result = makeParallelRequests(id)
emit(Resource.Success(result))
catch (e: Throwable) {
emit(Resource.Error(e))
}
}
}

I agree with #Tenfour04 that those nested flows are overly complicated and there are several ways to simplify this (#Tenfour04's solution is a good one).
If you don't want to rewrite everything then you can fix that one line that breaks the structured concurrency:
.stateIn(viewModelScope, SharingStarted.Lazily, null)
With this the whole ViewModel flow is started in the ViewModel's scope while the view starts the collect from a separate scope (viewLifecycleOwner.lifecycleScope which would be the Fragment / Activity scope).
If you want to cancel the flow from the view, you need to use either the same scope or expose a cancel function that would cancel the ViewModel's scope.
If you want to cancel the flow from the ViewModel itself (at the return#flow statement) then you can simply add:
viewModelScope.cancel()

End flow/coroutines task before go further null issue

Fragment
private fun makeApiRequest() {
vm.getRandomPicture()
var pictureElement = vm.setRandomPicture()
GlobalScope.launch(Dispatchers.Main) {
// what about internet
if (pictureElement != null && pictureElement!!.fileSizeBytes!! < 400000) {
Glide.with(requireContext()).load(pictureElement!!.url)
.into(layout.ivRandomPicture)
layout.ivRandomPicture.visibility = View.VISIBLE
} else {
getRandomPicture()
}
}
}
viewmodel
fun getRandomPicture() {
viewModelScope.launch {
getRandomPictureItemUseCase.build(Unit).collect {
pictureElement.value = it
Log.d("inspirationquotes", "VIEWMODEL $pictureElement")
Log.d("inspirationquotes", "VIEWMODEL VALUE ${pictureElement.value}")
}
}
}
fun setRandomPicture(): InspirationQuotesDetailsResponse? {
return pictureElement.value
}
Flow UseCase
class GetRandomPictureItemUseCase #Inject constructor(private val api: InspirationQuotesApi): BaseFlowUseCase<Unit, InspirationQuotesDetailsResponse>() {
override fun create(params: Unit): Flow<InspirationQuotesDetailsResponse> {
return flow{
emit(api.getRandomPicture())
}
}
}
My flow task from viewmodel doesn't goes on time. I do not know how to achieve smooth downloading data from Api and provide it further.
I was reading I could use runBlocking, but it is not recommended in production as well.
What do you use in your professional applications to achieve nice app?
Now the effect is that that image doesn't load or I have null error beacause of my Log.d before GlobalScope in Fragment (it is not in code right now).
One more thing is definding null object I do not like it, what do you think?
var pictureElement = MutableStateFlow<InspirationQuotesDetailsResponse?>(null)
EDIT:
Viewmodel
val randomPicture: Flow<InspirationQuotesDetailsResponse> = getRandomPictureItemUseCase.build(Unit)
fragment
private fun makeApiRequest() = lifecycleScope.launch {
vm.randomPicture
.flowWithLifecycle(lifecycle, Lifecycle.State.STARTED)
.collect { response ->
if (response.fileSizeBytes < 600000) {
Log.d("fragment", "itGetsValue")
Glide.with(requireContext()).load(response.url)
.into(layout.ivRandomPicture)
layout.ivRandomPicture.visibility = View.VISIBLE
} else {
onFloatingActionClick()
}
}
}
Edit2 problem on production, another topic:
Link -> What is the substitute for runBlocking Coroutines in fragments and activities?

First of all, don't use GlobalScope to launch a coroutine, it is highly discouraged and prone to bugs. Use provided lifecycleScope in Fragment:
lifecycleScope.launch {...}
Use MutableSharedFlow instead of MutableStateFlow, MutableSharedFlow doesn't require initial value, and you can get rid of nullable generic type:
val pictureElement = MutableSharedFlow<InspirationQuotesDetailsResponse>()
But I guess we can get rid of it.
Method create() in GetRandomPictureItemUseCase returns a Flow that emits only one value, does it really need to be Flow, or it can be just a simple suspend function?
Assuming we stick to Flow in GetRandomPictureItemUseCase class, ViewModel can look something like the following:
val randomPicture: Flow<InspirationQuotesDetailsResponse> = getRandomPictureItemUseCase.build(Unit)
And in the Fragment:
private fun makeApiRequest() = lifecycleScope.launch {
vm.randomPicture
.flowWithLifecycle(lifecycle, State.STARTED)
.collect { response ->
// .. use response
}
}
Dependency to use lifecycleScope:
implementation 'androidx.lifecycle:lifecycle-runtime-ktx:2.4.0'

RxJava filtering with inside object

For start I must say I am begginer in RxJava.
Data class:
#Entity(tableName = "google_book")
data class GoogleBook (
#PrimaryKey(autoGenerate = true) val id: Int=0,
val items: ArrayList<VolumeInfo>)
data class VolumeInfo(val volumeInfo: BookInfo){
data class BookInfo(val title: String, val publisher: String, val description: String, val imageLinks: ImageLinks?)
data class ImageLinks(val smallThumbnail: String?)
}
Function which helps me save data to database:
fun searchBooks(query: String) {
searchJob?.cancel()
searchJob = viewModelScope.launch {
val text = query.trim()
if (text.isNotEmpty()) {
bookRepository.getBooksFromApi(query)
.map { t ->
t.items.map {
it.volumeInfo.imageLinks?.smallThumbnail?.filter { x -> x != null }
}
t
}
.subscribeOn(Schedulers.io())
.observeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe { x ->
x?.let { googleBook ->
searchJob?.cancel()
searchJob = viewModelScope.launch {
bookRepository.deleteGoogleBook()
bookRepository.insertGoogleBook(googleBook)
}
} ?: kotlin.run {
Log.d(TAG, "observeTasks: Error")
}
}
}
}
}
As seen I want to filter list within GoogleBook object by image parameter but It doesnt work. I cannot add filtering for data class ImageLinks so I have no Idea how can I make it right
I am asking mostly about this part:
.map { t ->
t.items.map {
it.volumeInfo.imageLinks?.smallThumbnail?.filter { x -> x != null }
}
t
}
Thanks for reading

welcome to RxJava, you gonna love it.
As far as I can tell the issue with your filtering simply relies here:
.map { t ->
t.items.map {
it.volumeInfo.imageLinks?.smallThumbnail?.filter { x -> x != null })
} // this returns you a new list filtered list here, but does not modify the original one
t // but you return the same data object here, it is not modified at all
}
// also consider naming it bookInfo if it is actually a bookInfo
What you should do is make a copy of your object with the filtered elements, something like this:
fun filterGoogleBookBySmallThumbNail(googleBook: GoogleBook): GoogleBook {
val filteredItems = googleBook.items.filter { it.volumeInfo.imageLinks?.smallThumbnail == null }
return googleBook.copy(items = ArrayList(filteredItems)) // now a new googleBook item is created with the filtered elements
}
// snippet to adjust then
bookRepository.getBooksFromApi(query)
.map { googleBook -> filterGoogleBookBySmallThumbNail(googleBook) }
//...
Some additional notes / suggestions I have:
I don't see you actually disposing of the subscription of the Observable.
bookRepository.getBooksFromApi(query) If this line returns an Observable, even if you cancel the job, you will be still observing that Observable. If it returns a Single then you are in luck, because after one element it is disposed.
To properly dispose, in cancellation you would have to do something like this(still i would recommend the other two rather, just wanted to note the not disposing):
searchJob = viewModelScope.launch {
val text = query.trim()
if (text.isNotEmpty()) {
val disposable = bookRepository.getBooksFromApi(query)
//...
.subscribe { x ->
//...
}
try {
awaitCancellation() // this actually suspends the coroutine until it is cancelled
} catch (cancellableException: CancellationException) {
disposable.dispose() // this disposes the observable subscription
// that way the coroutine stays alive as long as it's not cancelled, and at that point it actually cleans up the Rx Subscription
}
Seems wasteful that you start a new coroutine job just to do actions
If you want to go the Rx way, you could make the
bookRepository.deleteGoogleBook() and bookRepository.insertGoogleBook(googleBook) Completable, and setup the observable as:
bookRepository.getBooksFromApi(query)
//..
.flatMap {
bookRepository.deleteGoogleBook().andThen(bookRepository.insertGoogleBook(it)).andThen(Observable.just(it))
}
//..subscribeOn
.subscribe()
Seems weird you are mixing coroutine and RX this way
if you don't want to go full Rx, you may consider converting your Observable into a kotlin coroutine Flow, that would be easier to handle with coroutine cancellations and calling suspend functions.
I hope it's helpful

Communication between view and ViewModel in MVVM with LiveData

What is a proper way to communicate between the ViewModel and the View, Google architecture components give use LiveData in which the view subscribes to the changes and update itself accordingly, but this communication not suitable for single events, for example show message, show progress, hide progress etc.
There are some hacks like SingleLiveEvent in Googles example but it work only for 1 observer.
Some developers using EventBus but i think it can quickly get out of control when the project grows.
Is there a convenience and correct way to implement it, how do you implement it?
(Java examples welcome too)

Yeah I agree, SingleLiveEvent is a hacky solution and EventBus (in my experience) always lead to trouble.
I found a class called ConsumableValue a while back when reading the Google CodeLabs for Kotlin Coroutines, and I found it to be a good, clean solution that has served me well (ConsumableValue.kt):
class ConsumableValue<T>(private val data: T) {
private var consumed = false
/**
* Process this event, will only be called once
*/
#UiThread
fun handle(block: ConsumableValue<T>.(T) -> Unit) {
val wasConsumed = consumed
consumed = true
if (!wasConsumed) {
this.block(data)
}
}
/**
* Inside a handle lambda, you may call this if you discover that you cannot handle
* the event right now. It will mark the event as available to be handled by another handler.
*/
#UiThread
fun ConsumableValue<T>.markUnhandled() {
consumed = false
}
}
class MyViewModel : ViewModel {
private val _oneShotEvent = MutableLiveData<ConsumableValue<String>>()
val oneShotEvent: LiveData<ConsumableValue<String>>() = _oneShotData
fun fireEvent(msg: String) {
_oneShotEvent.value = ConsumableValue(msg)
}
}
// In Fragment or Activity
viewModel.oneShotEvent.observe(this, Observer { value ->
value?.handle { Log("TAG", "Message:$it")}
})
In short, the handle {...} block will only be called once, so there's no need for clearing the value if you return to a screen.

What about using Kotlin Flow?
I do not believe they have the same behavior that LiveData has where it would alway give you the latest value. Its just a subscription similar to the workaround SingleLiveEvent for LiveData.
Here is a video explaining the difference that I think you will find interesting and answer your questions
https://youtu.be/B8ppnjGPAGE?t=535

try this:
/**
* Used as a wrapper for data that is exposed via a LiveData that represents an event.
*/
open class Event<out T>(private val content: T) {
var hasBeenHandled = false
private set // Allow external read but not write
/**
* Returns the content and prevents its use again.
*/
fun getContentIfNotHandled(): T? {
return if (hasBeenHandled) {
null
} else {
hasBeenHandled = true
content
}
}
/**
* Returns the content, even if it's already been handled.
*/
fun peekContent(): T = content
}
And wrapper it into LiveData
class ListViewModel : ViewModel {
private val _navigateToDetails = MutableLiveData<Event<String>>()
val navigateToDetails : LiveData<Event<String>>
get() = _navigateToDetails
fun userClicksOnButton(itemId: String) {
_navigateToDetails.value = Event(itemId) // Trigger the event by setting a new Event as a new value
}
}
And observe
myViewModel.navigateToDetails.observe(this, Observer {
it.getContentIfNotHandled()?.let { // Only proceed if the event has never been handled
startActivity(DetailsActivity...)
}
})
link reference: Use an Event wrapper

For showing/hiding progress dialogs and showing error messages from a failed network call on loading of the screen, you can use a wrapper that encapsulates the LiveData that the View is observing.
Details about this method are in the addendum to app architecture:
https://developer.android.com/jetpack/docs/guide#addendum
Define a Resource:
data class Resource<out T> constructor(
val state: ResourceState,
val data: T? = null,
val message: String? = null
)
And a ResourceState:
sealed class ResourceState {
object LOADING : ResourceState()
object SUCCESS : ResourceState()
object ERROR : ResourceState()
}
In the ViewModel, define your LiveData with the model wrapped in a Resource:
val exampleLiveData = MutableLiveData<Resource<ExampleModel>>()
Also in the ViewModel, define the method that makes the API call to load the data for the current screen:
fun loadDataForView() = compositeDisposable.add(
exampleUseCase.exampleApiCall()
.doOnSubscribe {
exampleLiveData.setLoading()
}
.subscribeOn(Schedulers.io())
.observeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe(
{
exampleLiveData.setSuccess(it)
},
{
exampleLiveData.setError(it.message)
}
)
)
In the View, set up the Observer on creation:
viewModel.exampleLiveData.observe(this, Observer {
updateResponse(it)
})
Here is the example updateResponse() method, showing/hiding progress, and showing an error if appropriate:
private fun updateResponse(resource: Resource<ExampleModel>?) {
resource?.let {
when (it.state) {
ResourceState.LOADING -> {
showProgress()
}
ResourceState.SUCCESS -> {
hideProgress()
// Use data to populate data on screen
// it.data will have the data of type ExampleModel
}
ResourceState.ERROR -> {
hideProgress()
// Show error message
// it.message will have the error message
}
}
}
}

You can easily achieve this by not using LiveData, and instead using Event-Emitter library that I wrote specifically to solve this problem without relying on LiveData (which is an anti-pattern outlined by Google, and I am not aware of any other relevant alternatives).
allprojects {
repositories {
maven { url "https://jitpack.io" }
}
}
implementation 'com.github.Zhuinden:event-emitter:1.0.0'
If you also copy the LiveEvent class , then now you can do
private val emitter: EventEmitter<String> = EventEmitter()
val events: EventSource<String> get() = emitter
fun doSomething() {
emitter.emit("hello")
}
And
override fun onViewCreated(view: View, savedInstanceState: Bundle?) {
super.onViewCreated(view, savedInstanceState)
viewModel = getViewModel<MyViewModel>()
viewModel.events.observe(viewLifecycleOwner) { event ->
// ...
}
}
// inline fun <reified T: ViewModel> Fragment.getViewModel(): T = ViewModelProviders.of(this).get(T::class.java)
For rationale, you can check out my article I wrote to explain why the alternatives aren't as valid approaches.
You can however nowadays also use a Channel(UNLIMITED) and expose it as a flow using asFlow(). That wasn't really applicable back in 2019.

How to clear LiveData stored value?

According to LiveData documentation:
The LiveData class provides the following advantages:
...
Always up to date data: If a Lifecycle starts again (like an activity going back to started state from the back stack) it receives the latest location data (if it didn’t already).
But sometimes I don't need this feature.
For example, I have following LiveData in ViewModel and Observer in Activity:
//LiveData
val showDialogLiveData = MutableLiveData<String>()
//Activity
viewModel.showMessageLiveData.observe(this, android.arch.lifecycle.Observer { message ->
AlertDialog.Builder(this)
.setMessage(message)
.setPositiveButton("OK") { _, _ -> }
.show()
})
Now after every rotation old dialog will appear.
Is there a way to clear stored value after it's handled or is it wrong usage of LiveData at all?

Update
There are actually a few ways to resolve this issue. They are summarized nicely in the article LiveData with SnackBar, Navigation and other events (the SingleLiveEvent case). This is written by a fellow Googler who works with the Architecture Components team.
TL;DR A more robust approach is to use an Event wrapper class, which you can see an example of at the bottom of the article.
This pattern has made it's way into numerous Android samples, for example:
Plaid
Architecture Blueprints
IOSched
Why is an Event wrapper preferred over SingleLiveEvent?
One issue with SingleLiveEvent is that if there are multiple observers to a SingleLiveEvent, only one of them will be notified when that data has changed - this can introduce subtle bugs and is hard to work around.
Using an Event wrapper class, all of your observers will be notified as normal. You can then choose to either explicitly "handle" the content (content is only "handled" once) or peek at the content, which always returns whatever the latest "content" was. In the dialog example, this means you can always see what the last message was with peek, but ensure that for every new message, the dialog only is triggered once, using getContentIfNotHandled.
Old Response
Alex's response in the comments is I think exactly what you're looking for. There's sample code for a class called SingleLiveEvent. The purpose of this class is described as:
A lifecycle-aware observable that sends only new updates after
subscription, used for events like navigation and Snackbar messages.
This avoids a common problem with events: on configuration change
(like rotation) an update can be emitted if the observer is active.
This LiveData only calls the observable if there's an explicit call to
setValue() or call().

If you need simple solution, try this one:
class SingleLiveData<T> : MutableLiveData<T?>() {
override fun observe(owner: LifecycleOwner, observer: Observer<in T?>) {
super.observe(owner, Observer { t ->
if (t != null) {
observer.onChanged(t)
postValue(null)
}
})
}
}
Use it like a regular MutableLiveData

I`m not sure if it will work in your case, but in my case (increasing/decreasing items amount in Room by click on views) removing Observer and checking if there is active observers let me do the job:
LiveData<MenuItem> menuitem = mViewModel.getMenuItemById(menuid);
menuitem.observe(this, (MenuItem menuItemRoom) ->{
menuitem.removeObservers(this);
if(menuitem.hasObservers())return;
// Do your single job here
});
});
UPDATE 20/03/2019:
Now i prefer this:
EventWraper class from Google Samples inside MutableLiveData
/**
* Used as a wrapper for data that is exposed via a LiveData that represents an event.
*/
public class Event<T> {
private T mContent;
private boolean hasBeenHandled = false;
public Event( T content) {
if (content == null) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("null values in Event are not allowed.");
}
mContent = content;
}
#Nullable
public T getContentIfNotHandled() {
if (hasBeenHandled) {
return null;
} else {
hasBeenHandled = true;
return mContent;
}
}
public boolean hasBeenHandled() {
return hasBeenHandled;
}
}
In ViewModel :
/** expose Save LiveData Event */
public void newSaveEvent() {
saveEvent.setValue(new Event<>(true));
}
private final MutableLiveData<Event<Boolean>> saveEvent = new MutableLiveData<>();
LiveData<Event<Boolean>> onSaveEvent() {
return saveEvent;
}
In Activity/Fragment
mViewModel
.onSaveEvent()
.observe(
getViewLifecycleOwner(),
booleanEvent -> {
if (booleanEvent != null)
final Boolean shouldSave = booleanEvent.getContentIfNotHandled();
if (shouldSave != null && shouldSave) saveData();
}
});

In my case SingleLiveEvent doesn't help. I use this code:
private MutableLiveData<Boolean> someLiveData;
private final Observer<Boolean> someObserver = new Observer<Boolean>() {
#Override
public void onChanged(#Nullable Boolean aBoolean) {
if (aBoolean != null) {
// doing work
...
// reset LiveData value
someLiveData.postValue(null);
}
}
};

You need to use SingleLiveEvent for this case
class SingleLiveEvent<T> : MutableLiveData<T>() {
private val pending = AtomicBoolean(false)
#MainThread
override fun observe(owner: LifecycleOwner, observer: Observer<T>) {
if (hasActiveObservers()) {
Log.w(TAG, "Multiple observers registered but only one will be notified of changes.")
}
// Observe the internal MutableLiveData
super.observe(owner, Observer<T> { t ->
if (pending.compareAndSet(true, false)) {
observer.onChanged(t)
}
})
}
#MainThread
override fun setValue(t: T?) {
pending.set(true)
super.setValue(t)
}
/**
* Used for cases where T is Void, to make calls cleaner.
*/
#MainThread
fun call() {
value = null
}
companion object {
private const val TAG = "SingleLiveEvent"
}
}
And inside you viewmodel class create object like:
val snackbarMessage = SingleLiveEvent<Int>()

I solved it like that. Live data will clear itself when there is no observer
class SelfCleaningLiveData<T> : MutableLiveData<T>(){
override fun onInactive() {
super.onInactive()
value = null
}
}

The best solution I found is live event library which works perfectly if you have multiple observers:
class LiveEventViewModel : ViewModel() {
private val clickedState = LiveEvent<String>()
val state: LiveData<String> = clickedState
fun clicked() {
clickedState.value = ...
}
}

Might be an ugly hack but... Note: it requires RxJava
menuRepository
.getMenuTypeAndMenuEntity(menuId)
.flatMap { Single.fromCallable { menuTypeAndId.postValue(Pair(it.first, menuId)) } }
.flatMap { Single.timer(200, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS) }
.subscribe(
{ menuTypeAndId.postValue(null) },
{ Log.d(MenuViewModel.TAG, "onError: ${it.printStackTrace()}") }
)

I know It's not the best way or even a professional way but if you do not hav time to do it the right way you can recreate the MutableLiveDataa after you observed it. it would be like :
private void purchaseAllResultFun() {
viewModel.isAllPurchaseSuccess().observe(getViewLifecycleOwner(), isSuccess -> {
if (!isSuccess) {
failedPurchaseToast();
}else {
successfulPurchaseToast();
}
//reset mutableLiveData after you're done
viewModel.resetIsAllSuccessFull();
});
}
//function in viewmodel class
public void resetIsAllSuccessFull(){
purchaseRepository.reSetIsAllSuccessFull();
}
//function in repository class
public void resetIsAllSuccessFull(){
successLiveData = new MutableLiveData<>();
}
In this way if you need to recall purchaseAllResultFun() function it won't give the stored value.