Develop Reference

How does differentiate between Serialized data class and normal Serialized class?

While writing code for RecyclerView to get data I figured out there's a data class in Kotlin.
Following codes are taken from two different projects which are linked above.
#Serializable
data class MarsPhoto(
val id: String,
#SerialName(value = "img_src")
val imgSrc: String
)
class Contacts {
#SerializedName("country")
private val country:String? = null
fun getCountry():String?{
return country
}
}
I know that both classes are doing same job. So what does differentiate them? I also wonder in the MarsPhoto data class how they can get the id without declaring SerialName just the way they did for imgSrc. (I am just on the way to learning kotlin now, so I'm absolute beginner).

Basically for "data" class the compiler automatically derives the following members from all properties declared in the primary constructor:
equals()/hashCode() pair
toString() of the form "MarsPhoto(id=1, imgSrc=asdf)"
componentN() functions corresponding to the properties in their order of declaration.
copy()
You can read a lot more at enter link description here
On the SerializedName part of your question. if you are dealing with Gson lib by default it is using fields name as "SerializedName". And only if you want to use something different then field name, you can use SerializedName annotation and pass your custom value there. But usually, everybody just writes #SerializedName() with duplication of field names as value for every field.
It's a good idea if you are receiving and Serializing data from server from Json. Because Backend developers can use a bad keys in response, which you don't want to use in your code, so #SerializedName will be the only place where you will have to see this key, and you can name your fields however you like.

#Serializable used to mark class as serializable to disk or like into a file( alternative is Parcel able in android) special useful in case of process death or configuration changes and #SerializedName("country") used for json parsing when u receive the response from server

You get the id without #SerializedName because the JSON property field is the same as your variable name, but imgSrc and img_src is not. Still, even if they are the same, you should always use #SerializedName, because your variable names could be converted to random letters during code optimization, and obfuscation.

Set property type from specific class as parameter type

I have this sample data class:
data class Car ( var id: String )
Now I can create a fun as this:
fun doWhatever(id: String){}
My problem is that if my customer then tells me that Id is an int, I have to change it in both places.
So what I want is to set Car.id type as refence in fun doWhatever, something like this:
fun doWhatever(id: propertyTypeOfCarId){}
So I if the customer changes type, I only have to change it in the class.
I read all kind of posts, but I wasnt able to find the answer. Any idea how to achieve it?

If this isn't something you expect to be doing regularly, consider just using the refactoring tools the IDE provides. You code to handle a specific set of data, and if the structure of that data changes, you have to adapt the code to fit it. Baking in a bunch of "what if" functionality can add complexity, compared to just saying a String is a String and changing it if it ever needs changing, using the tools provided to make that as quick and easy as possible.
But sometimes you need to do this kind of thing, and Kotlin has some nice language features it can be worth using, like type aliases:
typealias CarId = String
data class Car(var id: CarId)
fun doWhatever(id: CarId){}
Two benefits here: the actual type is only defined in one place, so you can change that String to an Int without needing to change anything else - except stuff that relied on the ID being a String specifically of course
The other benefit is you're actually adding some semantic information by using that very specific type. That function isn't supposed to just take any old String - it's specifically meant to handle CarIds. It tells you what it's for, and that can make your code a lot easier to understand
(The function will accept Strings, because CarId is just an alias - an alternative name for a String - so it's not a way to enforce structure on your code, just a way to make it nicer to read and write. You can't define a new type that is a String in Kotlin unfortunately)

If the number of id types you support is limited, you can simply use method overloading:
fun doWhatever(id: String){}
fun doWhatever(id: Int){}
// etc.
Alternatively, you can use a reified generic parameter in your method to support any number of types:
inline fun <reified T> doWhatever(id: T) {
when (T::class) {
Int::class -> {}
String::class -> {}
}
}

android Room with kotlin value class?

I'm trying to use a room entity with a value class:
#JvmInline
value class UserToken(val token: String)
and the entity:
#Entity(tableName = TABLE_AUTH_TOKEN)
data class TokenEntity(
#PrimaryKey val id: Int = 0,
val token: UserToken
)
I get the following error:
error: Entities and POJOs must have a usable public constructor. You can have an empty constructor or a constructor whose parameters match the fields (by name and type).
public final class TokenEntity {
^
is it even possible to use room with value class? I couldn't find anything about this. thanks

See the comment from #CommonsWare. Android does not yet support value classes for Room.
The same holds true for the value classes introduced in kotlin 1.5. The type is not supported.
— Support Inline class in Room entity
Here is a possible explanation according to Kotlin Inline Classes in an Android World.
Looking to solve this you could try and add a TypeConverter for your Inline class, but since your Inline class is just the value it wraps when it’s compiled, this doesn’t make much sense and it doesn’t work as you’d expect even if you tried...
I’m just guessing it’s because this is a TypeConverter converting UserId to Int which is basically the same as Int to Int 😭. Someone will probably solve this problem, but if you have to create a TypeConverter for your Inline class then you are still plus one class for the count (multidex). 👎

I think yes if you can provide a type converter for it to change it to some sort of primitive data type (int , string, long ...etc) when it needs to be stored, and to change it back to its class type when it's fetched from database.
You can read about Type Converters from here
Referencing complex data using Room
other than that, your other class should be an entity and bind both your entities together using a Relation.
at least that's what I know about how to use Room.

UserToken always will have only one attribute? In this case, you don't need two classes, just use token: String directly on your entity class;
If you really need keep this class, you have two options:
TypeConverter, where you basically will convert the object into a json, and save as string in the database;
Relation, where you will transform the UserToken in a entity, and on TokenEntity save the tokenId.

How to create interchangeable class types for android fake testing?

I'm trying to create a fake class for my repository to test a view model.
As far as I understood, the key element here is to create two classes with a common interface so both classes would contain the same methods.
The problem is I get a Type mismatch when trying to initialize an object.
I tried to do the same in a simplified manner:
class fakeClass1 : fakeInterface {
override fun getAllData(): String {
return ""
}}}
class fakeClass2 : fakeInterface {
override fun getAllData(): String {
return ""
}}
interface fakeInterface {
fun getAllData(): String}
val fakeClass: fakeClass1 = fakeClass2()
But that didn't work either.
What am I missing?

Ok, I figured it out.
I was wrong to think that those two classes should be interchangeable.
I solved it by making the ViewModel take the common interface in its constructor instead of the actual repository class. This allows the ViewModel to take any class which implement this interface as it's repository.

I think you worked it out, but just so you're clear (this is an important, fundamental thing!)
val fakeClass: fakeClass1 = fakeClass2()
This is defining a variable called fakeClass that refers to an object with the fakeClass1 type. Then you assign an object with the fakeClass2 type.
But a fakeClass2 is not a fakeClass1, neither is a superclass of the other, so you can't treat one as the other. Your example is simple, but imagine you added coolFunction() to fakeClass1 - they'd now happen to have different structures, and trying to call that method on an object that doesn't have it would cause a crash.
The only thing those classes have in common, is that they both have the fakeInterface type - they are fakeInterfaces, and that guarantees they implement the stuff in that interface (your getAllData function in this case). So if you treat them both as that type instead:
val fakeClass: fakeInterface = fakeClass2()
you can use either one, because they're both fakeInterfaces (similar to how Ints and Doubles are different but they're both Numbers). Because fakeClass is now a fakeInterface, you can only access the functions and properties that a fakeInterface has - you can't call coolFunction() even if you happened to pass in a fakeClass1, because fakeInterface doesn't have that.
(You could cast the variable to fakeClass1, basically saying "oh by the way this object is actually this type as well", but at that point the type system can't guarantee you're correct unless you're explicitly checking fakeClass is fakeClass1, and it'll warn you if that's the case)
The Java tutorials are pretty good and they'll give you an overview about how the types each form a kind of "contract" you work with

Swift to Kotlin: Struct to Data Class Example

I have converted the following Swift code:
struct FooModel: Decodable {
public let id: String
public let bars: [[BarModel]]
}
to this Kotlin code:
data class FooModel (val id: String, val bars: List<List<BarModel>>)
The issue I am encountering, is my id is coming in null for the Kotlin code (via gson). Everything else in the Kotlin conversion is working fine and the entire JSON is populating all data classes, except for this tiny piece (the id variable).
I suspect my conversion here is the cause, any ideas?

If the id should be nullable do it like this:
data class FooModel (
val id: String?,
val bars: List<List<BarModel>>
)
The question mark makes this property nullable.

If the JSON you are getting is correct (the id value is there and coming to you as a string), your code should work. It's unclear what could be going wrong here if that's the case.
However, it is worth knowing that there is a big potential "gotcha" with Gson that you should be aware of: it's possible to declare a variable of a data class as non-nullable but still get a null after conversion. This can happen when an expected value is missing from the JSON response. In these cases Gson does not throw an error and I only found out later when I got a crash trying to access the non-nullable variable that should never have made it to me as null. I discovered this is a consequence of Gson using something like Class.newInstance() instead of a regular constructor when it creates these data classes, and then uses reflection to populate the data. More is written about this in another answer here: Why Kotlin data classes can have nulls in non-nullable fields with Gson?
Depending on your use case you might consider this to be a design flaw and a reason to avoid Gson in favor of other JSON serialization libraries. My personal favorite at the moment is Square's Moshi.

You can check if the value type you are getting from server matches with your variable id i.e. String on both the sides. Secondly you can try using SerializedName("id") included in library:
implementation 'com.google.code.gson:gson:2.9.0'