I am working on android application and some team members suggested using one activity and one parent layout for the whole application and each time we need a new screen we just inflate a new layout in the parent layout and destroy the old one.
I on the other hand think that using fragments would be the way to go.
Do you think one way is better than the other?
I would be grateful if you can think of solid arguments to support your claim.
Thank you
UPDATE:
We are using MVC in our application. They want to create a new class for the view while i opted for using the fragment as my view. As it stands now the application has one activity and one layout. To change the view we are calling the same layout,removing its child views and inflating the new view .I dont see how that would be better then just using the fragments as views
I think most Android developers will tell you to use one or more Activities or Fragments. But why?
Basically, because one Activity which is responsible for each and every View in your app would be something like a "god object". This is considered an antipattern, I suppose because it may fast become a maintenance nightmare.
The Android pattern of one Activity and several Fragments on the other hand is following the Single Responsibility Principle, so your code is easier to maintain. All the more so because Android-specific things like saving state on configuration change are much easier to implement if you are able to use the built-in methods.
When to choose between using two fragments and replacing one with the other in an activity (or child fragments in another fragment) or using two views and changing them using ViewSwitcher (or ViewFlipper)?
For example, while loading the data, I use a loading view, and then I want to change to the main view.
It really depends on your app structure. A ViewSwitcher may work, but is likely not the best way to do this. Another option you could do is not do a fragment at all, just change the content of the activity, but calling again setContentView(int) with the layout resource of the main view, once the loading is complete.
I never have used ViewSwitcher before. I read the documentation on the class. And I think ViewSwitcher is good for switching between 2 different views or layouts, only 2. More than 2, and you have to create another ViewSwitcher. The benefits that I see of ViewSwitcher are:
All the views (only 2 at most) and its objects are kept in memory. So it's fast.
It is meant to be fast since it extends ViewAnimator, made for animation.
Now for Fragments...It is commonly used by developers like myself. It has good support for managing many (not just 2) layouts. With help of FragmentManager, you can add, replace, or search for fragments. The benefits of Fragments are:
Management of UI is robust.
Android framework and system will manage memory to allow other apps to run. As a warning, this may be an issue with using Fragments and handling objects in memory.
It is memory efficient and I think it's quite fast. Coding fragments may be more of an issue. However since soo many developers use it, you have much support, like from me, in the SO community and Internet.
Good luck and have fun with Android :-)
I am planning an app and trying to explore all the possible development options/methods I have available. One thing I'm struggling to get my head around is Fragments. I see a lot of people praising them as you can "resuse" fragments throughout the app but I can't think of an example situation.
From some example apps I have looked at (all been tabular layouts) the code for each fragment has one layout, so why not have a seperate activity instead?
I am hoping to implement a tabular layout in my app. If anyone can give me an example of a fragment being reused within an app I hope it will give me a better understanding of the benefits.
"Reuse" is overrated. Of course - you can put this same fragment (with this same features) in different places of your application - let's say that you can use a fragment in different, horizontal and vertical layouts (as you probably saw in Google's tutorial).
But at the end using fragments simplifies your project - for example - you can switch fragments inside one activity and get benefits of much easier navigation and in app communication.
Using fragments gives you one more thing - flexibility. It's much easier to move some view from one place to another, or just remove from application. All that because fragment encapsulates logic and usually a view, still offering power of externally managed lifecycle.
(Thanks for comment from Richard Le Mesurier)
Fragment is not a View neither a ViewGroup. It is not a visual element at all. Fragment inherits directly from Object.
One should think of a Fragment as a unity of a reusable code, reusable in various Activities (the Activities consist of visible elements).
Thus if you can think of any code you can reuse through several Activities (even the same Activity with different layout) and that code somehow depends on Activity lifecycle, then you probably should make this code a Fragment.
I've started developing Android apps and I am wondering which way is better in case of adding fragments to activity. Let's assume that view for activity contain always three fragments. They won't changed. Always be the same. Thus is it better to add them by tags or include them in the activity code?
And a second question issue:
Let's say I have activity with fragment which is a list. Then when I clicked on item I want to show new view. Can I then replace the list fragment with new completely different fragment? Even if the answer is yes then is it better than creating new activity?
Thanks for all replies
which way is better in case of adding fragments to activity
One approach is not necessarily 'better' than the other - they both serve their own purposes, as with any static vs. dynamic comparison.
For example, fragments declared in a layout cannot be given arguments using setArguments(). Such a fragment can also not be replaced by another fragment: if it's part of the layout, it'll always be there. Of course you can still show/hide the instance, but attempting to actually remove it through a FragmentTransaction will simply not work. Static elements are usually easier to work with though, because they have a well-defined lifetime and behaviour.
Regarding your second question: yes, that's very possible. Some developers build their app around a single Activity container, swapping out fragments as the user navigates its way through the content. In most cases, from a user's point of view, there is little difference between doing this or having multiple activities. The important thing to keep in mind is to choose an approach you're comfortable with, doesn't overly complicate things and takes advantage of the patterns explained in Implementing Effective Navigation.
This question already has answers here:
What is the benefit of using Fragments in Android, rather than Views?
(6 answers)
Closed 10 years ago.
What is the advantage to using Fragments over using custom Views that are reused in different layouts?
In the original blog post introducing fragments, Dianne Hackborn says that
[Fragments] make it easier for developers to write applications that can scale
across a variety of screen sizes, beyond the facilities already
available in the platform.
and she goes on to explain Fragments in the context of making a tablet layout for an app that combines the UI of two activities from the phone version of the same app.
But it seems that the same reuse could be achieved using custom Views. The main different between Fragments and Views seems to be that they have differing lifecycles...
The Fragment lifecycle is:
onAttach(), onCreate(), onCreateView(), onActivityCreated(), onStart(), onResume(), onPause(), onStop(), onDestroyView(), onDestroy(), onDetatch().
The View lifecycle is:
ctor, onFinishInflate(), onAttachedToWindow(), onMeasure(), onLayout(), onDetatchedFromWindow()
I'd like to hear from developers with experience writing large apps about what benefits (if any) they've seen in using Fragments vs custom Views to divide up the UI into reusable pieces.
The main reason is that fragments are more reusable than custom views.
Sometimes you can't create a fully encapsulated UI component relying on views alone. This is because there are things you would want to put into your view but can't because only an Activity can handle them, thus forcing tight coupling between an Activity and a View.
Here is one such example. Lets say you want to create a reusable UI component that, among many things, want to capture a photo and do something with it. Traditionally you would fire an intent that starts the camera and returns with the captured image.
Notice that your custom UI component can't fully encapsulate this functionality because it will have to rely on hosting Activity's startActivityForResult because views don't accept activity results (they can indirectly fire an intent through context).
Now if you wanted to reuse your custom UI component in different activities you would be repeating the code for Activity.startActivityForResult.
Fragment on the other hand cleanly solve this problem.
Similarly your fragment can contribute items to your options menu, something traditionally only an Activity could do. Again this could be important if the state of your custom view dictates what goes in the menu.
A fragment is way more than just a view. In fact it can even be totally without a view. It can have all sorts of stuff in it including AsyncTasks, various Listeners, file and database access and so on and so on.
Think of it as a small activity, but you can have multiple of them on the screen and work with them all including communicating with each other while they are visible.
E.g. you could have a list of shopping cart displayed in one fragment and the currently selected cart in detail in another fragment. You then e.g. change the quantity of an item in the detail view and the list view could be notified about it and update the total price in the list view. You can totally orchestrate interactions like that nicely while e.g. still having only one of them visible on a smaller screen device.
I have refactored a large business app (>15 activities) from activities to fragments to get good tablet support and I would never start a new app without fragments.
Update Feb 2016: While the above still holds true, there are complexities with fragments that caused many people to entirely avoid using them. Newer patterns such as usage of MVC approaches and more powerful views provide alternatives. As they say .. YMMV.
Some description:
Imagine Activity as a plate that hold one big cake.
Fragment would be a container that slices the same cake into pieces.
Each slice contains it own logics (listeners, etc).
And in total they are almost no different with the one big cake.
The benefit:
When you plate can't hold a big cake. (Screen is small) You can easily use a a few plates (Activity) to hold each of them WITHOUT the need to move your logics into the new activity.
Better re-usability. I have some instances where I could reuse a fragment entirely in another App. You might claim that a custom view could does that too. But refer to point 1, I could reuse it with just few lines of layout changes but for a custom view, it have to find a way to plug it into both layout and code.
It is, in some sense, a more OO ways of organising your UI logics in Android programming. When you have a feature (A new partition on the screen for example), you create a new Fragment class, with minor modification to existing activity class. However if you are programming only with activity, you will need to add logics and make big modification on tested class.
Just my 2 cents. :)
The lifecycle methods are probably your biggest hint. If you think about it, they correlate closely to the activity lifecycle (with some hooks into the activity and views). In fact, in the article you linked, Hackborn says:
In some ways you can think of a Fragment as a mini-Activity
As with many things in software design/development, there are a multitude of ways to do things. There are many different places you could put your code. Yes, you could probably put a lot into a view, but keeping different concerns separated in different classes is a good thing though. The classic pattern of this is MVC and it applies in this scenario. You don't want to bake in too much controller logic into your view. It's better to keep it in controller-like classes which are the activity and now the fragment. This is why the fragment's lifecycle is more like the activity's than the view's--it was made to facilitate this kind of organization.
I touched Fragments once and found them not very useful (see this post). From what I have read, A Fragment is really a fancy word for an Object with access to Activity Context. I like to ignore Fragments in my work, and just create these Objects myself. I have created very large, very demanding apps by passing an Activity to constructors, instead of Context. One major benefit, however, for using Fragments is that they are supported by the View layout system - so you can easily add them to Android xml (if you use it for your layouts).
Custom views are much more work than just using fragments in place of your activities. if you decide to use Activities and custom Views, you have to create your custom view, and then you have to implement the same activity lifecycle methods in your activity (a very similar lifecycle is used for fragments).
Using Fragments also allows you to separate components into their own classes (Fragments), rather than having too much logic in a single Activity. Let me ground that with an example:
Say you're implementing a magazine reader application. using fragments, you could create a fragment: ArticleList, which displays a list of articles, and another fragment: ArticleDisplay, which handles the logic for displaying content. you can then specify how these fragments should interact using the fragments tools, so that on a handset, you can use the full screen real-estate for ArticleDisplay, while on a tablet, you can display the fragments side by side.
If you were to attempt this with an Activity/custom view, you'd have the logic for both Fragments in your monolithic Activity, you'd have to write a custom view, and you'd have to debug this unwieldy monster.
Fragments are, in general, a more sophisticated and powerful way to write your applications. They can do everything an Activity can do, and more. If you don't need the extra functionality, the defaults will probably get you where you need to go, and with less work.