I'm a beginner to android development, and I'm trying to write my code in an MVC pattern, but I'm having trouble understanding how a model would work. As far as I can tell every time you start a new activity with an intent you are not able to pass a model along with it. As far as i can tell you'd have to reinitialize it each time you start a new activity. Am I missing something? I looked into Parcelable, but it seems that you loose your methods if you make your model Parcelable. right now I'm building a log in system, which checks my local sqllite db on start up if the user has already logged in, and if so it passes to another activity, otherwise it passes to the log in activity, but I wan't to keep that user model alive through all the activities. Is thee a way to do that?
You might want to also consider keeping a static reference around to the model data that you want to share across activities so that you don't have to keep serializing/deserializing the model when switching between activities. You can get away with using Parcelable if your models are small, but at some point, performance may become an issue.
I'm working on a project where we keep the models in a Singleton that we can access throughout the app, and although I generally hate Singleton's for how they can make unit testing more difficult, I have found this approach to perform better with larger models than trying to rely on Android's serialization mechanism.
Here's is a very rough example of what I mean (disclaimer: I have not actually run tested this code, but I hope this illustrates the concept):
You might have a singleton class that I terribly called Models
public class Models {
private static Models instance;
private boolean isInitialized = false;
private User user;
private OtherInterestingModel otherInterestingModel;
private Models() {
}
public static synchronized Models getInstance() {
if (instance == null) {
instance = new Models();
}
return instance;
}
public void loadModels() {
if (!isInitialized) {
/*
* One-time model initialization here.
*/
isInitialized = true;
}
}
public User getUser() {
return user;
}
public OtherInterestingModel getOtherInterestingModel() {
return otherInterestingModel;
}
}
In your LoginActivity, you can initialize the Models class, say, in your onCreate():
public class LoginActivity extends Activity {
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
Models.getInstance().loadModels();
User user = Models.getInstance().getUser();
OtherInterestingModelData otherData = Models.getInstance().getOtherInterestingModel();
// Do something with the model data...
}
/*
* This might be called after the user enters data and clicks a login button...
*/
private void login() {
startActivity(new Intent(this, AwesomeLoggedInActivity.class));
}
}
Once the user successfully logs into your app, you could have basically the same code in your main activity:
public class AwesomeLoggedInActivity {
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
Models.getInstance().loadModels();
User user = Models.getInstance().getUser();
OtherInterestingModelData otherData = Models.getInstance().getOtherInterestingModel();
// Do something with the model data...
}
}
Notice that by having a Singleton, you avoided having to serialize the model data by passing it through the intent that started the main activity.
Yes, you can do that with the Parcelable interface.
You do not lose your class's methods when you implement the Parcelable interface. The interface simply defines a method for writing your member variables to a Parcel object when you need to pass the object around.
Once you retrieve the data from your Intent via getParcelableExtra(), the object is recreated from the Parcel and you can once again treat it as an instance of whatever class it is.
For example, if you have a User class that extends Parcelable, you can bundle it with an Intent by calling putExtra("user", myUser). myUser is then (behind the scenes) packed into a Parcel and attached to the Intent. In your next Activity, you can retrieve that User object with User myUser = (User) getParcelableExtra("user");, and the Parcel will be unpacked and returned to you. You wil once again have a fully functioning User object.
Related
Previously, I was using activities in my project and was sending data using Intent from one activity to another which works perfectly fine.
Now requirement changes, and I have to show all things on Dialogs, instead of activities, so there will separate 3-4 dialog class and single activity.
Now I want the same flow on dialog also, but there is a problem to pass data temporarily exactly how intent works!
I tried with Singleton, but the problem is it remains data until the whole lifecycle, but I don't want that.
I can't use the interface also because there are lots of things to pass.
Also, I can't use bundle fundle n all those, because this all depends on runtime, I meant it depends upon if user fill input
Question: How can I pass data from one class to another class or activity? and it should not save value for the whole lifecycle.
statically sending data is an option but its not good way, because memory to static variables is assigned at Application level and can be cleared when memory needed. The best way is to use
Object Oriented approach
For example if you have a class, You can send data in class constructor, or can send it through function call
class class1
{
public class1(Object data) { // constructor
// you can use this data
}
//// Or through function call
public void func(Object data) { // this method can be called by other classes which has its object
// you can use this data
}
}
Now lets assume you have another class
class class2
{
class1 obj = new class1(your_data_object); // if you want to send through constructor
void someMethod() {
obj.func(your_data_object); // send data whatever you want to send
}
}
Obviously your case will not be as simple as my example, but to handle complex cases you can implement interfaces.
Interface Example
define an interface
interface myListener {
public void listen(Object data);
}
now lets say you want to call class2 method from class1. then class2 must implement this interface.
public class class2 implements myListener {
#override
public void listen(Object data)
{
/// you got data here, do whatever you want to do that with that data.
}
}
Now in class1 if you have interface object you can call class2 method
interfaceRef.listen(your_data);
Try with EventBus or BroadCastReceivers to pass data accordingly in local variables.
EventBus is a publish/subscribe event bus for Android and Java. EventBus... simplifies the communication between components. decouples event senders and receivers. performs well with Activities, Fragments, and background threads.
http://greenrobot.org/eventbus
First Register to EventBus in your Activity
#Override
public void onStart() {
super.onStart();
EventBus.getDefault().register(this);
}
#Override
public void onStop() {
EventBus.getDefault().unregister(this);
super.onStop();
}
Now pass the data from anywhere ,whether it is activity/fragment/background service etc etc etc like :
EventBus.getDefault().postSticky(new MessageEvent("your data here");
Now in your activity receive this message like :
#Subscribe(sticky = true,threadMode = ThreadMode.MAIN)
public void onMessageEvent(MessageEvent event) {
Log.e("TAG","Event Received");
Log.e("TAG",event.getData);
}
I am building a menu from which the user can select items. They can edit their selections whenever necessary. The singleton would be a class containing the list of all selectable items. Whenever new activities are opened, the singleton would have the correct state of all items.
The reason I am asking this is because implementing Serializable creates a new instance (albeit almost identical) of the item.
Yes you could use a singleton for this. It would be something like:
public class MenuData {
private static MenuData instance;
private boolean isItemASelected;
public static MenuData getInstance() {
if (instance == null) {
instance = new MenuData();
}
return instance;
}
public boolean isItemASelected() {
return isItemASelected;
}
public void setItemASelected(boolean itemASelected) {
isItemASelected = itemASelected;
}
}
However I wouldn't recommend this. This data will only be around for as long as your Application is in memory. As soon as your app gets killed by Android all the variables will be cleared and the state will have been lost.
If your menu items are constant then I'd recommend using SharedPreferences to store the state. If they are dynamic then use the SQL database. This way the options are persisted even if your app gets killed.
Here is my scenario.
I have an android activity in which I want to abstract my I/O dependencies. The dependencies are represented by this interface (edited for brevity and simplicity):
public interface ITimeDataServer {
TimeRecord[] get(int userID);
void save(TimeRecord record);
}
What I want is for my activity to be able to call these interface methods, and leave the implementation to be supplied by the calling code. (Pretty standard, I think).
ITimeDataServer myServer;
int myUserID;
void loadRecords() {
TimeRecord[] records = myServer.get(myUserID);
// etc...
}
My difficulty is, how can I ensure that myServer gets set?
This seems like a common problem, but I can't find a clean solution.
My first thought would be that myServer would be passed in through the constructor, but Android activities aren't really instantiated with constructors.
I've come up with several solutions, but they're all icky in some way:
Icky Solution 1
Create a static method to launch the activity class which takes an ITimeDataServer parameter and stores it in a static variable from which the activity can access it:
private static ITimeDataSource theDataSource;
public static void launch(Activity currentActivity, ITimeDataSource dataSource) {
theDataSource = dataSource;
Intent intent = new Intent(currentActivity, MainActivity.class);
currentActivity.startActivity(intent);
}
This is icky because (a) the data source is static and not actually associated with the instance, and (b) a consumer could initiate the activity by the standard activity API rather than this static method, which will cause NullPointerException.
Icky Solution 2
I can create a Provider class which provides a singleton instance of ITimeDataSource, which needs to be initialized by the calling library before use:
public class TimeDataSourceProvider {
private static ITimeDataSource myDataSource = null;
public void initialize(ITimeDataSource dataSource) {
myDataSource = dataSource;
}
public ITimeDataSource get() {
if (myDataSource == null)
throw new NullPointerException("TimeDataSourceProvider.initialize() must be called before .get() can be used.");
else
return myDataSource;
}
}
This seems a little less icky, but it's still a little icky because the activity's dependency is not obvious, and since there may be many paths to launch it, it's highly possible that some of them would forget to call TimeDataSourceProvider.initialize().
Icky solution 3
As a variation on #2, create a static IODependencyProvider class which must be initialized with ALL dependencies on app startup.
public class IODependencyProvider {
static ITimeDataSource myTimeData;
static IScheduleDataSource myScheduleData; // etc
public static void initialize(ITimeDataSource timeData, IScheduleDataSource scheduleData /* etc */) {
myTimeData = timeData;
myScheduleData = scheduleData;
//etc
}
public static ITimeDataSource getTimeData() {
if (myTimeData == null)
throw new NullPointerException("IODependencyProvider.initialize() must be called before the getX() methods can be used.");
else
return myTimeData;
}
// getScheduleData(), etc
}
This seems superior to #1 and #2 since a failure to initialize would be much harder to sneak by, but it also creates interdependencies among the data types that otherwise need not exist.
...and other icky variations on that theme.
The common themes that make these solutions crappy:
the need to use static fields to pass non-serializable information to an activity
the lack of ability to enforce initialization of those static fields (and subsequent haphazardness)
inability to clearly identify an activity's dependencies (due to reliance on statics)
What's a nooby Android developer to do?
As long as these dependencies implement Parcelable correctly, you should be able to add them to your intent, then unparcel them as ITimeDataServer and get the correct class.
I found a nice solution here, in the least-loved answer.
I define the library activity as abstract and with no default constructor, but a constructor that takes an interface, like so:
public abstract class TimeActivity extends AppCompatActivity {
private ITimeDataSource myTimeDataSource;
public TimeActivity(#NonNull ITimeDataSource dataSource) {
myTimeDataSource = dataSource;
}
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.activity_time);
// do stuff with myTimeDataSource!
}
}
Then, the calling code can create a concrete subclass with its chosen implementation that does have a parameterless constructor. No static members, easy-peasy!
This allows you to abstract and inject all sorts of crazy behaviours! Woooo!
(Note that the concrete subclass activity needs to be manually added to AndroidManifest.xml, like all activities, or the app will crash when it tries to launch.)
Problem:
I'm saving some data in a singleton class... Sometimes it happens, that this singleton returns null data, from which I derive, that it was destroyed...
My idea/thoughts:
Actually, I thought, the singleton will live as long as the application lives and as long as the application remembers anything else like fragments state for example, my singleton will exist with it's last data too. Isn't this correct?
concrete problem:
My case is following: I go from my main fragment to a sub fragment and save an selected object in my singleton... I stop using my app and come back after some time. My app remembers it's state and recreates the fragments, my fragment want to get the selected object from my singleton and get's null.
I thought, a singleton should exist as long as the application exists and therefore needs no saving... Whenever the application is ended, nothing will be restored anyway and my app won't remember anything, so that's ok anyway. Is that a wrong assumption?
I need an answer to this question, because if I'm sure, that above thoughts are correct, I at least know, that I have to search for the problem somewhere else...
Here is a short summury of what I've found out (or have had forgotten)
Activitys can be recreated, although the application was destroyed
Singletons can be garbage collected if not referenzed from somewhere
So you HAVE TO SAVE your singletons! Otherwise, whenever your phone is on low memory, it may kill the application and create a NEW application, but RECREATE the activities...
For me, as I'm actually always use a single activity with fragments, it is easy to solve the problem:
when I create an activity, I call a static restore function (BEFORE calling get!!!)
in the onSaveInstanceState of the activity a always save the singleton to the bundle
=> so my singleton looks like following (base structure)
public class DataCache implements Parcelable
{
private static final String TAG = DataCache.class.getName();
private static DataCache mCache = null;
public static synchronized final DataCache get()
{
if (mCache == null)
mCache = new DataCache();
return mCache;
}
private DataCache()
{
// init...
}
public void save(Bundle outState)
{
outState.putParcelable(TAG, this);
}
public static void restore(Bundle savedInstanceState)
{
if (savedInstanceState != null && savedInstanceState.containsKey(TAG))
{
// only restore, if necessary, i.e. if application was destroyed but activity saved our last cache
if (mCache == null)
mCache = savedInstanceState.getParcelable(TAG);
}
}
}
My MainActivity calls another Activity A which needs to access some members of MainActivity.
What is the best way to send a reference to Main Activity (or its context) to Activity A without resorting to complicated methods like parcelables etc?
There are some heavyweight android wrestling matches here but I am not sure that it is relevant to my problem.
details
I have Alert and Alerted objects in a one-to-many relationship (Alerted represents the various times an Alert was rung).
AlertsListActivity extends ListActivity which displays a list of Alert objects from a SQLite database table (primary key: alertId). It has an AlertsListAdapter.
AlertedsListActivity has a ListFragment which displays a list of Alerted objects from Alerted table (foreign key is alertId from Alert table).
It has an AlertedsListAdapter.
AlertsListActivity needs to call AlertedsListActivity to display the list of Alerted objects. I used startActivityForResult().
Inside AlertedsListAdapter
public View getView(int position, View convertView, ViewGroup parent) {
final Alert alertItem = (Alert) mainActivity.alertsListAdapter.getItem(position);
final Alerted alertedItem = (Alerted) getItem(position);
...
I do need the Alert objects also, in order to display some identifying information from them with each Alerted list item. Hence I need the reference to mainActivity.alertsListAdapter
How can AlertedsListActivity access AlertsListActivity?
Update: Since I did not get any solutions, I implemented a workaround. The data that I needed to access from Main Activity, I modified. So the Alert object was made a parcelable, and the SQLOpenHelper was made a singleton.
This allows the data to be accessed from Activity A.
Here's the simple, common way to do it:
singletons typically have variables like the below example, "useThisContext" or "mainFeedIsHere".
public class Cloud
{
private static Cloud ourInstance = new Cloud();
private Cloud() { Utils.Log("cloud singleton launched"); }
public synchronized static Cloud getInstance()
{
return ourInstance;
}
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
public Context useThisContext;
another example ...
public class Feed
{
private static Feed ourInstance = new Feed();
private Feed()
{
Utils.Log("feed singleton launched");
freshestPostsForDisplay = new ArrayList<ParseObject>();
}
public synchronized static Feed getInstance()
{
return ourInstance;
}
public List<ParseObject> freshestPosts;
public MainActivity mainFeedIsHere;
Quite simply when everything launches (or when it changes), those "things" need to set those variables in the singleton. In other words, those things "tell the singleton, where they are." It's that simple.
So, in the MainActivity perhaps, in onCreate, it might say something like...
CLOUD.useThisContext = this;
FEED.mainFeedIsHere = this;
Then for example inside Feed.java you may have say
mainFeedIsHere.feedReload();
It goes without saying you have to check that they are not null (but how else could it be?) and you have to keep them up-to-date as it were. (i.e., for whatever reason you may want to change "useThisContext" -- again how else could it be?)
{Sometimes you'll have one "centralised" singleton .. perhaps "State" .. to sort of combine all these together - so that anyone can "get to" any of those "exposed" things as needed. This is, really, how game engines go; so that you can say more or less SoundEffects.Booms() or Tanks.Faster() or AI.FindVillains() at any time anywhere.}
Cheers!
Since I did not get any solutions, I implemented a workaround. The data that I needed to access from Main Activity, I modified. So the Alert object was made a parcelable, and the SQLOpenHelper was made a singleton.
This allows the data to be accessed from Activity A.