I'd like to put my database connection object to Application class. I read some tutorials and everywhere I see explicit implementation of a singleton pattern. Something like this
public class MyApplication extends Application {
private static MyApplication singleton;
public static MyApplication getInstance(){
return singleton;
}
#Override
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
singleton = this;
}
}
My question is why do I need to do this explicit implementation? Nobody explains.
I'd like to add there some property, initialized in onCreate() and get it's value in activity.
myProp = (MyApplication)getApplicationContext().getMyProperty()
Is it really necessary to implement singleton pattern?
An Application class is an access point to application context and generally it is used as a initializator for all application-scoped dependencies like your database object. This class is initialized only once per application and persists in memory until application is no longer in memory. So it is a natively created singleton.
By having such static access point to application you may have access to the application context in any class and in general case this context is much better for retrieving resources, system services etc. when you need such dependencies in your custom classes, because it doesn't hold a link to the activity and view so is a leak-safe. Of course in your example the Activity has an access to application, but you have to cast context anyway and better use same approach for a whole app.
Despite you may use it like a global access point to all application scoped and initialized dependencies, do not overload it with huge initialization logic, better create some other singletons for this purpose and just initialize it from Application class. In a big project consider using DI framework, Dagger the best one, for providing dependencies.
By default the application class is singleton..You are not have allowed to create application yourself.Android System will create this when the first time app is loaded into the memory.You are using singleton pattern here just to get Application object from anywhere within the application
Related
I have started working on MVVM architecture for android application.I have a doubt that is it right to pass the context to view model ? If not then how can my view model can access the context if needed.
I am doing the following things:
Feed data using some EditText.
Send this data to View model.
View model send this data to repository
Repository storing this data to shared preferences of the device.
As shared preferences required context to instantiate the object.
I am new to this architecture any guidance would be helpful for me, thanks in advance.
I think the use of ApplicationContext is ok, You can extend your ViewModel from AndroidViewModel and whenever you need a reference to the context use getApplication() methods.
Even better, if your using dagger, you don't need this at all, you just inject your ApplicationContext where ever you need it. It can be in your view model or a utility class that handles shared preference, etc.
UPDATE 2019
I don't want to mislead anyone with my old post, so figured I better update it.
With the latest release of the architectural components and JetPack, MVVM is now a real competitor for actual proper structure of breaking apart the code base in a very clean way.
The View is the Activity or Fragment along with the xml that is inflated basically (that's a bit of a weird MVVM, I know, but let's roll with it).
The ViewModel is the actual ViewModel classes offered now with lifecycle scopes and observers. Due to these new features, and life cycle management tools, the ViewModel is very nice at maintaining the data for the view while accessing the Repository Layer of Room DB or Retro API for fetching appropriate LiveData, Observable Data or just standard Models.
I'll leave this here as I feel it was very relevant during the earlier pre Architecture Implementation Days, but if you are not using the Architecture Components and JetPack, Boy are you missing out lol. Code is getting so much cleaner and smaller. :)
OLD REPLY
This is a long debated discussion among the Android community. When we refer to MVC it is obvious that Models (aka data holding objects) are the M, Controllers = C for the Activity classes (in iOS they actually call them UIViewControllers) and the V for the View in Android is the XML file itself. Now some would argue the architectural breakdown of what represents what. However, let's move past this and discuss MVVM.
MVVM has been around for many years now. There have been a few attempts in the past to bring it to Android through 3rd party binding tools, but it ends up more hacky then it is worth.
Recently with the release of native Data Binding Android is finally capable of doing a somewhat clean implementation of MVVM. So there are a couple options here. You can do
M = Models (data holding objects)
V = Views (the XML file itself representing the UI)
VM = This is where debates occur.
Some say in order to be a "true" ViewModel one must have true separation from the Presentation layer and the Activity class itself has lifecycle callbacks thus making it unworthy of being known as the ViewModel.
Others would point out that in order to handle most of the actions triggered from the ViewModel one must have an awareness of onActivityResult, onNewIntent, onBroadcastReceived, onPause or other life cycle handlings to appropriately manage the user experience. So On my team we consider the Activity as the ViewModel. Otherwise you are passing the activity down to a viewmodel and tightly coupling the two anyways, making a giant hideous maintenance nightmare of code.
So you if you want my opinion, stick to treating the Activity as your ViewModel. Get your data to the ViewModel just like any other binding technology like INotifyPropertyChanged in WPF. You do it through your Binding.
I do two things to make this happen. One I have an Activity variable in the XML layout to inject in the onCreate for the binding setup which gives the XML direct binding rights to any observable properties in the viewModel aka the activity. Then I inject whatever variables I need to make use of as well for example you may have a WeatherModel that populates a forecast that lives within the Activity that you would also set in the onCreate to allow the XML access to both it's ViewModel (aka activity) and it's viewModel's Objects.
The other alternative is to make a ViewModel object and inject it in the XML in the onCreate of your Activity and then continue to call back and forth from the activity to the viewmodel for handling actions and lifecycles and feel free to manage that nightmare haha, I did an entire project this way and by the end of it, I redid it all to avoid all the duplication of coding efforts and hideous back and forths.
Goodluck and I hope that helps.
A very good question, and it is not as simple as it seems!
You can see an example from Google team here.
They solved the problem with the help of the factory.
There it is pass (of course) the Application context (not Activity context !).
A small problem - and so much boilerplate code!
My decision:
public class MainApplication extends Application {
public void onCreate() {
AppSharedPref sharedPref = AppSharedPref.getInstance(PreferenceManager.getDefaultSharedPreferences(this));
AppRepository.getInstance(sharedPref);
Repository is singltone (a lot of code is skipped for brevity):
public class AppRepository implements AppDataSource {
public static AppRepository getInstance(#NonNull AppSharedPref sharedPref) {
if (INSTANCE == null) {
INSTANCE = new AppRepository(sharedPref);
}
return INSTANCE;
}
In ViewModel call:
public class MyViewModel extends AndroidViewModel {
// constructor
public MyViewModel(#NonNull Application application) {
repository = AppRepository.getInstance(.....);
}
Look into Dagger 2!
That's true , you definitively shouldn't pass Activity to your xml or ViewModel. It will make your ViewModel no better than these 2000-line activities that we are trying to move away from with this architecture.
The solution we have in our MVVM project is to inject SharedPreferences with Dagger. You can of corse use ApplicationContext as well but do you need multiple instances of SharedPreferences in the project??
We a have a utility class for SharedPreferences and it is nice to keep it a singleton and inject wherever you need it.
I use MVVM in my application. I always try not to use Context inside my View Model. I also encountered the problem with SharedPreferences requiring a context to access the preference files. One of my solutions without using Dagger is to create a Preference utility class that will have reference to the application context. You initialize this utility class in you Application class. You get reference to the shared preference through a public static method provided by the utility class. You can directly call the utility class from your repository class. I prefer to contain all logic related to data storage in the repository class that's why i call the sharedpreference utility class in my repository class.
PreferenceManager.java
public class PreferenceManager {
private static SharedPreferences mSharedpreferences;
private PreferenceManager() {}
public static void initialize(Context context) {
mSharedpreferences= context.getSharedPreferences(context.getPackageName(),
Context.MODE_PRIVATE);
}
public static SharedPreferences getSharedPreferences() {
return mSharedpreferences;
}
}
App.java
public class App extends Application {
#Override
public void onCreate() {
PreferenceManager.initialize(this);
}
}
Repository.java
public class Repository {
public void someMethod() {
PreferenceManager.getSharedPreferences.edit.putBoolean("sample", true).apply();
}
You should use AndroidViewModel() in the ViewModel, pass application:Applicatoin, and use getApplication() to get the context.
ViewModel Example:
class MainTrendsViewModel (application: Application) : AndroidViewModel(application) {
// ViewModel must extend AndroidViewModel(), and pass application to it.
// Code here and
// use getApplication() to get context
}
Other anwer that work for me that you could reference: reference answer that works for me
You should use AndroidViewModel class or keep reference to Application context in yours ViewModel implementation in this case.
ViewModel class was designed to keep data persistent between different instances of Activity through its lifecircle and storing reference to one of Activity instance context really doesn't make sense.
An extended Application class can declare global variables. Are there other reasons?
Introduction:
If we consider an apk file in our mobile, it is comprised of
multiple useful blocks such as, Activitys, Services and
others.
These components do not communicate with each other regularly and
not forget they have their own life cycle. which indicate that
they may be active at one time and inactive the other moment.
Requirements:
Sometimes we may require a scenario where we need to access a
variable and its states across the entire Application regardless of
the Activity the user is using,
An example is that a user might need to access a variable that holds his
personnel information (e.g. name) that has to be accessed across the
Application,
We can use SQLite but creating a Cursor and closing it again and
again is not good on performance,
We could use Intents to pass the data but it's clumsy and activity
itself may not exist at a certain scenario depending on the memory-availability.
Uses of Application Class:
Access to variables across the Application,
You can use the Application to start certain things like analytics
etc. since the application class is started before Activitys or
Servicess are being run,
There is an overridden method called onConfigurationChanged() that is
triggered when the application configuration is changed (horizontal
to vertical & vice-versa),
There is also an event called onLowMemory() that is triggered when
the Android device is low on memory.
Application class is the object that has the full lifecycle of your application. It is your highest layer as an application. example possible usages:
You can add what you need when the application is started by overriding onCreate in the Application class.
store global variables that jump from Activity to Activity. Like Asynctask.
etc
Sometimes you want to store data, like global variables which need to be accessed from multiple Activities - sometimes everywhere within the application. In this case, the Application object will help you.
For example, if you want to get the basic authentication data for each http request, you can implement the methods for authentication data in the application object.
After this,you can get the username and password in any of the activities like this:
MyApplication mApplication = (MyApplication)getApplicationContext();
String username = mApplication.getUsername();
String password = mApplication.getPassword();
And finally, do remember to use the Application object as a singleton object:
public class MyApplication extends Application {
private static MyApplication singleton;
public MyApplication getInstance(){
return singleton;
}
#Override
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
singleton = this;
}
}
For more information, please Click Application Class
Offhand, I can't think of a real scenario in which extending Application is either preferable to another approach or necessary to accomplish something. If you have an expensive, frequently used object you can initialize it in an IntentService when you detect that the object isn't currently present. Application itself runs on the UI thread, while IntentService runs on its own thread.
I prefer to pass data from Activity to Activity with explicit Intents, or use SharedPreferences. There are also ways to pass data from a Fragment to its parent Activity using interfaces.
The Application class is a singleton that you can access from any activity or anywhere else you have a Context object.
You also get a little bit of lifecycle.
You could use the Application's onCreate method to instantiate expensive, but frequently used objects like an analytics helper. Then you can access and use those objects everywhere.
Best use of application class.
Example: Suppose you need to restart your alarm manager on boot completed.
public class BaseJuiceApplication extends Application implements BootListener {
public static BaseJuiceApplication instance = null;
public static Context getInstance() {
if (null == instance) {
instance = new BaseJuiceApplication();
}
return instance;
}
#Override
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
}
#Override
public void onBootCompleted(Context context, Intent intent) {
new PushService().scheduleService(getInstance());
//startToNotify(context);
}
Not an answer but an observation: keep in mind that the data in the extended application object should not be tied to an instance of an activity, as it is possible that you have two instances of the same activity running at the same time (one in the foreground and one not being visible).
For example, you start your activity normally through the launcher, then "minimize" it. You then start another app (ie Tasker) which starts another instance of your activitiy, for example in order to create a shortcut, because your app supports android.intent.action.CREATE_SHORTCUT. If the shortcut is then created and this shortcut-creating invocation of the activity modified the data the application object, then the activity running in the background will start to use this modified application object once it is brought back to the foreground.
I see that this question is missing an answer. I extend Application because I use Bill Pugh Singleton implementation (see reference) and some of my singletons need context. The Application class looks like this:
public class MyApplication extends Application {
private static final String TAG = MyApplication.class.getSimpleName();
private static MyApplication sInstance;
#Contract(pure = true)
#Nullable
public static Context getAppContext() {
return sInstance;
}
#Override
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
Log.d(TAG, "onCreate() called");
sInstance = this;
}
}
And the singletons look like this:
public class DataManager {
private static final String TAG = DataManager.class.getSimpleName();
#Contract(pure = true)
public static DataManager getInstance() {
return InstanceHolder.INSTANCE;
}
private DataManager() {
doStuffRequiringContext(MyApplication.getAppContext());
}
private static final class InstanceHolder {
#SuppressLint("StaticFieldLeak")
private static final DataManager INSTANCE = new DataManager();
}
}
This way I don't need to have a context every time I'm using a singleton and get lazy synchronized initialization with minimal amount of code.
Tip: updating Android Studio singleton template saves a lot of time.
I think you can use the Application class for many things, but they are all tied to your need to do some stuff BEFORE any of your Activities or Services are started.
For instance, in my application I use custom fonts. Instead of calling
Typeface.createFromAsset()
from every Activity to get references for my fonts from the Assets folder (this is bad because it will result in memory leak as you are keeping a reference to assets every time you call that method), I do this from the onCreate() method in my Application class:
private App appInstance;
Typeface quickSandRegular;
...
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
appInstance = this;
quicksandRegular = Typeface.createFromAsset(getApplicationContext().getAssets(),
"fonts/Quicksand-Regular.otf");
...
}
Now, I also have a method defined like this:
public static App getAppInstance() {
return appInstance;
}
and this:
public Typeface getQuickSandRegular() {
return quicksandRegular;
}
So, from anywhere in my application, all I have to do is:
App.getAppInstance().getQuickSandRegular()
Another use for the Application class for me is to check if the device is connected to the Internet BEFORE activities and services that require a connection actually start and take necessary action.
Source: https://github.com/codepath/android_guides/wiki/Understanding-the-Android-Application-Class
In many apps, there's no need to work with an application class directly. However, there are a few acceptable uses of a custom application class:
Specialized tasks that need to run before the creation of your first activity
Global initialization that needs to be shared across all components (crash reporting, persistence)
Static methods for easy access to static immutable data such as a shared network client object
You should never store mutable instance data inside the Application object because if you assume that your data will stay there, your application will inevitably crash at some point with a NullPointerException. The application object is not guaranteed to stay in memory forever, it will get killed. Contrary to popular belief, the app won’t be restarted from scratch. Android will create a new Application object and start the activity where the user was before to give the illusion that the application was never killed in the first place.
To add onto the other answers that state that you might wish store variables in the application scope, for any long-running threads or other objects that need binding to your application where you are NOT using an activity (application is not an activity).. such as not being able to request a binded service.. then binding to the application instance is preferred. The only obvious warning with this approach is that the objects live for as long as the application is alive, so more implicit control over memory is required else you'll encounter memory-related problems like leaks.
Something else you may find useful is that in the order of operations, the application starts first before any activities. In this timeframe, you can prepare any necessary housekeeping that would occur before your first activity if you so desired.
2018-10-19 11:31:55.246 8643-8643/: application created
2018-10-19 11:31:55.630 8643-8643/: activity created
You can access variables to any class without creating objects, if its extended by Application. They can be called globally and their state is maintained till application is not killed.
The use of extending application just make your application sure for any kind of operation that you want throughout your application running period. Now it may be any kind of variables and suppose if you want to fetch some data from server then you can put your asynctask in application so it will fetch each time and continuously, so that you will get a updated data automatically.. Use this link for more knowledge....
http://www.intridea.com/blog/2011/5/24/how-to-use-application-object-of-android
I am developing an application with custom Application class which initializes a couple of singletons so they live during all application working time. I also have a couple of services in my application which work with these singletons. Is it possible situation that Application class will be destroyed by android with singletons' instances before services so services will not be able to use them? Or application lives always even for services of it's context? What is the best way to find a way out of this situation?
Thanks.
Regarding the application object:
The application object is the main absolute starting point on any Android app. It will always exist before any of the Manifest declared items such as Activity, Service and BroadcastReceiver. So relax that the singletons will be there for you.
Regarding the singleton paradigma:
That's a big discussion topic, you can google more about it so what follows is my personal opinion on it. Whatever is the reason for your singletons (a database, an bitmap caching, a FileUtils) I think it's ok and correct to initialise them on the very first point of entry of your app, which is the Application. But the application itself is not an object meant to carry or hold those objects, that way my suggested design approach is to:
=> on your singleton object/class you'll have to:
private static MySingletonClass instance; // reference to the single object
private MySingletonClass(Context c){ // private constructor to avoid construction from anywhere else
// let's say it needs the context for construction because it's a database singleton
}
public static MySingletonClass get(){ //
if(instance == null) throw new RuntimeException("This singleton must be initialised before anything else");
return instance;
}
public static void init(Context c){ // call the initialisation from the Application
instance = new MySingletonClass(c);
}
=> and then on your Application object you simply init the singleton
onCreate(){
MySingletonClass.init(getApplicationContext());
}
with that way you'll keep the necessary initialisation, enforce the singleton pattern but to access the object you call to that object class not to the application. I know it's just a organisational difference, but I believe that that's what separate good and bad code.
So for example on your service the call is: MySingletonClass.get() and should never be MyApplication.mySingle.
hope it helps.
From my understanding service can't live without application context, service is bound to the application with the Context reference so I think if the application is killed also the Context is killed and that lead that all components are been killed,
you can read here for more info
http://developer.android.com/guide/components/fundamentals.html#proclife
What exactly is the purpose of Application class.
what are the benefits of extending it to a custom subclass
Why use it ?
Can global variables be stored in any other class achieve same goal as Application ?
Nice question !
Your application is a context that is always running while your activities and services are running.
It is also the first context to be created and the last to be destroyed.
Thus, it surrounds the life cycle of your app.
You can use the application class as a way to share data or components (for dependency injection for instance). For instance if you want to share a singleton between activities, you can create the instance in the application class and provide a getter, then all other contexts can get the singleton via
((cast to your class)getApplicationContext()).getFoo();
There may be some use cases where you need to do stuff before even your first activity is launched, then do it in the onCreate method of the application class.
On the other hand, you should never relie on the onDestroy method of the Application class, as it is not always called. There is no contract for that on Android.
But this is rare and, usually, you don't need to override the application class though. Dependency injection can be achieved in other ways by RoboGuice or Dagger for instance.
Two things makes this Class very useful:
Application class is instantiated before any other Activity.
It holds the Application Context
Context brings a host of resources for us: we can figure out some device properties, load some resources, initiate a SQLite database etc, etc.
All of this happens before any Activity loads, and all of this is globally available to the Activities.
Simple example of what I mean:
public class App extends Application{
private static Resources sResources;
//--I want to load strings resources from anywhere--
public static String loadStringResource(int resID) {
return sResources.getString(resID);
}
#Override
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
sResources = getResources();
//---I want to load all preferences when my app starts---
PreferenceManager.setDefaultValues(this,R.xml.prefs,false);
}
}
Extending the Application class allows you to integrate into the application's lifecycle.
This is also useful to store global application-level information (though it's usually good to keep your activities 'independent')
The Application class is aware of the Application Context and is loaded when your app is loaded so it holds the proper callbacks for the application lifecycle before your activity starts. You most likely would not want to extend this class.
From the API docs:
There is normally no need to subclass Application. In most situation, static singletons can provide the same functionality in a more modular way. If your singleton needs a global context (for example to register broadcast receivers), the function to retrieve it can be given a Context which internally uses Context.getApplicationContext() when first constructing the singleton.
http://developer.android.com/reference/android/app/Application.html
A few days ago I've discovered that singleton can become anti-pattern in Android. My singleton (class with private constructor and instance stored in static field) was deleted (instance was deleted despite the fact other activities were still using this singleton (via getInstance() method) so another instance had to be created ) because Activity from which it was first invoked was deleted (after invoking finish for only this one activity).
I've read already how this problem can be resolved however I've also just read "Effective Java". There is said that "Single-element enum type is the bast way to implement a singleton".
So now I'm wondering what would be the lifecycle of singleton created this way in Android application? Would it be the same like in case of "standard singleton implementation" so after destroying activity from which it was invoked the first time it will be destroyed (even if it used also in other activities)?
I'm not asking about proper android singleton implemenation or the singleton pattern itself (is it pattern or anti-pattern etc) but I'd like to know what be the lifecycle of such enum singleton object and when it will be destroyed.
In all cases, the classes you use are tied to the ClassLoader that loaded them. This is true in Java in general, not just Android. Android will isolate activities by using new ClassLoaders each time -- at the least, it doesn't promise it won't, and it does as far as I can tell.
Any singleton, or other class-level state, is tied to the Class which is tied to the ClassLoader. This is why your state "disappears"; it's actually that your calling code is seeing a new Class in a new ClassLoader.
So, your enum-based trick, or anything else along these lines, would have exactly the same behavior. You just can't "persist" activity information this way. You can and should write to a SQLite DB. You could probably stash it in the SharedPreferences too.
The application object is a good location to store information which needs to be accessible to various activity or service instances. You can retrieve it like this (where this is an Activity or Service):
private MyApplication app;
in onCreate(...){
...
this.app = (MyApplication) this.getApplication();
...
}
Remember to set the name also in the manifest:
Set the attribute "name" of the "application" tag:
The value is the path to the class relative to the package of your app.
The application object is created when the app is started, you can initialize like in an activity or service in it's onCreate() method.
One thing to remember: The application object can survive closing your "last" activity. In this case you may get the same application object with the state from the previous interaction with your app. If this is a problem you must somehow detect the initial start of your app (e.g. using a special launcher activity without UI, which initializes the application object and then starts a new intent.
BTW, the same may happen with singletons if they have not yet been lost to garbage collection.
My secure singleton implementation is like that:
I create a singleton class which has an attribute of boolean 'didReceiveMemoryWarning';
public class SingleTon(){
public boolean didReceiveMemoryWarning = true;
...
...
}
In application first screen(It is exactly first launch screen)(I have a splash screen that is visible 3 sec)
SingleTon.getInstance().didReceiveMemoryWarning = false;
And in every Activity's onCreate() method, check this boolean data,
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
if(SingleTon.getInstance().didReceiveMemoryWarning){
{ Load your data from local to your SingleTon class,
because your app was released by OS};
}
}
it is my implementation.