Develop Reference

Is it bad practice to access a view in doInBackground()?

Is it bad practice to pass a UI element, such as a TextView, to AsyncTask.doInBackground() (through AsyncTask.execute()) and to read fields from the view in the background thread? (I know it's not okay to alter GUI elements from a background thread.)

It is not great, for the simple reason that you do not know if that widget is any good anymore.
Suppose the following happens:
You execute the AsyncTask, but it is stuck behind other tasks and does not run right away
The user rotates the screen, or presses BACK, or otherwise destroys the activity
Your AsyncTask finally starts running and you try accessing this widget
In the best-case scenario, the widget is simply wrong. In the worst-case scenario, whatever you call on it causes some sort of crash, because the hosting activity is destroyed.
AsyncTask itself is fairly obsolete; modern Android development uses other things (LiveData, RxJava, and Kotlin coroutines being the biggest candidates). However, if you wish to use AsyncTask, please ensure that it does not try referencing the activity or its widgets from doInBackground().

Why is there no Android API for getting the current Activity?

The question, How can I get the current Activity? has been asked dozens of times on Stackoverflow and other sites and there are many proposed approaches. However, all of them have drawbacks in one form or another.
In this posting, I am assuming that there is no solution provided for this in Android's APIs, e.g., something like: Application.getTask().getRootActivity().
Wouldn't it be nice if there was :-)?
So, to be clear, I'm not asking for an answer to How can I get the current Activity?
Instead, I am asking for the reason that such a capability has not been provided. Given that each running app has a task (assuming that the task hasn't been emptied) and each such task has a root Activity, it would seem to be easy to provide access to that root Activity.
The fact that that such access is not provided, when it is so clearly desired, implies to me that there is something fundamental about the Android architecture that I don't understand.
What is it that I'm missing? Why is this information not provided by the Android APIs?
For background, here is a section summarizing some of the approaches that have been proposed. I found the following two links particularly informative (each of the approaches below is presented at one or both of the links).
Links
How to get current foreground activity context in android?
Android: How can I get the current foreground activity (from a service)?
Approaches
Static Hook
Reflection
ActivityManager
Other (Instrumentation, AccessibilityService, UsageStatsManager)`
ActivityManager
The ActivityManager approach only provides the name of the Activity class, not the current Activity instance. E.g., for a Context instance c:
c.getSystemService().getActivityManager()
.getAppTasks().get(0).getTaskInfo()
.topActivity().getClassName()
Reflection
My favorite is reflection, as proposed by _AZ, but that approach is fragile, given that it relies on internals. What I would like to see from Android is this approach provided via a standard API that developers could then safely rely on.
Static Hook
The most common approach is using a static hook to save a reference to the currently running Activity. The hook can be either per-Activity or per-Application. Memory leaks can be avoided by saving/destroying the hook's value (e.g., in onCreate()/onDestroy(), onStart()/onStop(), onPause()/onResume()). However, issues can arise when multiple Activities are involved (e.g., due to overlapping lifecycles -- see below).
I implemented a static hook approach which does the following (to be perfectly transparent, I haven't implemented #1 yet -- I am currently using a per-Activity static hook, which is a bug).
Provides a class that extends Application to provide the hook. The hook contains a Stack; each node in the stack is a simple ActivityInfo class which contains a reference to an Activity instance as well as the state of that instance (CREATED, STARTED, RESUMED).
Provides a class called ActivityTracker that extends Activity. I then extend each of my Activities with ActivityTracker. ActivityTracker uses its lifecycle callbacks to push/pop itself to/from the stack and to update its state -- my other Activities don't have to do anything.
In theory, this would allow me to always know the full state of the task's back stack -- the full set of Activities, including the root Activity, as well as their current state. In practice, however, there is a twist -- when one Activity starts another Activity, their lifecycles overlap. During that period, peeking at the stop of the stack can yield an unexpected Activity instance.
From: https://developer.android.com/guide/components/activities/activity-lifecycle.html#soafa, "Coordinating activities":
Here's the order of operations that occur when Activity A starts
Acivity B:
Activity A's onPause() method executes.
Activity B's onCreate(), onStart(), and onResume() methods execute in sequence. (Activity B now has user focus.)
Then, if Activity A is no longer visible on screen, its onStop() method executes
Of course, this could be managed also. The bottom line is that we do have a global context available for storing information (the Application) and we do have full information about Activity lifecycle transitions, so with enough effort I believe that this static stack-based approach could probably be made pretty bullet-proof.
But in the End
But in the end it feels like I am simply rewriting code which probably already exists internally for managing an Activity back stack, which is why I ask (in case you've forgotten):
Why is there no Android API for getting the current Activity?
UPDATE
In this update, I'll summarize what I've learned from this thread and my own experiments and research. Hopefully, this summary will be useful to others.
Definitions
I'm going to use the following definitions for "Activity Visibility States", based on the Activity State definitions at https://developer.android.com/guide/components/activities/activity-lifecycle.html.
-----------------------------------
Visibility State Definition
-----------------------------------
Not Visible Created+Stopped
Partially Visible Started+Paused
Fully Visible Resumed
-----------------------------------
Issues
The very definition of "Current Activity" is murky. When I use it, I mean the single Activity in the Fully Visible state. At any given instant, there may or may not be such an Activity. In particular, when Activity A starts Activity B, A's onPause() gets called and then B's onCreate(), onStart() and onResume(), followed by A's onStop(). There is a stretch between A's onPause() and B's onResume() where neither is in the Fully Visible state, so there is no Current Activity (as I define it). Of course, there are also situations where a background thread may want to access a Current Activity and there may or may not be an Activity at all, much less a Current Activity.
I've also realized that I may not always need a Current ("Fully Visible") Activity. In many cases, I may simply need a reference to an existing Activity, whether or not it is currently visible. In addition, that reference might be to just any Activity (for situations where I need to pass a generic Activity reference to some API method) or it might be to a specific Activity subclass instance (so that I can trigger some code specific to that Activity subclass).
Finally, there is the need to understand when Activity lifecycle callbacks are called by the main UI looper and how events like configuration changes are handled. For example, if I create a DialogFragment using an Activity intance which is currently in the "Not Visible" state, will it ever get displayed and, if so, when? Along similar lines, it turns out that the onDestroy() and onCreate() methods caused by a configuration change are contained in the same message in the UI's message queue (see Android UI Thread Message Queue dispatch order), so no other messages will be processed between those two callbacks (during a configuration change). Understanding this level of processing seems to be critical, but documentation on it is sorely lacking, if not missing completely.
Approaches
Here is a collection of approaches that can be used to address most of the above situations.
Background
For discussion, assume Activity A and Activity B, where A creates B.
Generally speaking, a "global" variable can be created by making it
"public static" on pretty much any class. Conceptually, extending
the Application class and adding it to the extended class would be
good, but if that's too much work it could be included (for
instance) in one of the Activity classes.
Generic Activity Reference
Useful whenever a generic Activity is needed.
Create a global variable. In both A and B, have onCreate() set it to "this" and onDestroy() set it to null.
Topmost Activity Reference
Useful whenever you want to access the currently visible Activity.
Create a global variable. In both A and B, have onResume() set it to "this". This approach works fine unless all Activities exit, in which case you may need to create a separate flag to indicate that situation. (That flag could be the Generic Activity Reference implementation mentioned above.)
Specific Activity Reference
Useful whenever a handle to a specific Activity subclass instance is needed.
In both A and B: create a global variable in the Activity subclass itself. Have onCreate() set it to "this and onDestroy() set it to null.
Application Context
Useful whenever a Context spanning the lifecycle of the entire app is needed or when you don't care about using a specific Activity Context (e.g., to create a Toast from a background thread).
You can get this from Activity's getApplication() and store it on a static hook.
Handling Configuration Changes
There may be times when you want to stop/start a background thread only across an Activity "session", where I define "session" to include the series of Activity instances which may be created and destroyed due to configuration changes. In my particular case, I have a Bluetooth Chat Activity and an associated background thread to handle the network connection. I don't want to have the connection destroyed and created each time the user rotates the device, so I need to create it only when one doesn't exist and destroy it only if a configuration change isn't underway. The key here is understand when onDestroy() is called due to a configuration change. This can be done with or without fragments. As is often the case, I prefer the non-fragment approach since the fragment approach doesn't seem worth the extra complexity to me.
Approach 1: Without Fragments
In onCreate(), create the background thread if it doesn't exist yet. In onDestroy(), destroy the background thread only if isFinally() returns false.
Approach 2: With Fragments
This works well because the FragmentManager will store fragment instances across configuration changes if setRetainInstance(true) is used. For an excellent example of this, see http://www.androiddesignpatterns.com/2013/04/retaining-objects-across-config-changes.html. The example is for AsyncTasks, but can also be applied to managing a background thread (just create the thread instead of an AsyncTask in the fragment's onCreate() and then destroy the thread in the fragment's onDestroy()).
Closing
Fully understanding these issues requires a deep understanding of how the UI looper processes its message queue -- when Activity callbacks are called, how other messages are interleaved with them, when display updates occur, etc. For instance, if a DialogFragment is created using an instance of a non-visible Activity, will it get displayed at all and, if so, when?
Perhaps some day Android will provide a deeper API to Tasks and their associated backstacks, along with documentation describing the UI's message processing and associated mechanisms in more detail. Until then, more "source code and/or ... empirical analysis" :-).
Thanks,
Barry

If all you want you want to know is which Activity is foremost and accepting user interactions, just create a BaseActivity that extends Activity and override onResume() and save a reference to "this" in a static variable. All of your other activities should extend BaseActivity. You're done.

The short answer I would guess is that only one activity can ever be active at a time in a given app, and that activity obviously knows who it is (it is itself) -- so the only answer any activity can get to "what activity is currently active" can only ever be "you are, silly".
For simple apps with a clear division between the different activity classes, this works fine, and so that's a great percentage of most of the apps in the play store. It doesn't work so hot when you're getting real clever with encapsulation and polymorphism, as I'm sure you've discovered, but I don't think Google is really targeting those types of developers.
Just my $0.02, I don't think you'll get an "official" answer here.

Down sides of Async Task If Any

I know you are using it quite well with your Non-UI codes in AsnycTask but I am just wondering if there is any kind of problem while using AsyntTask? I am not having any code which produce the problem. But I am just curious to know Any bad experience if you have with AsnycTask and would like to share it.

Memory Leak :
Even though activity is destroyed, AsyncTask holds the Activity's reference since it has to update UI with the callback methods.
cancelling AsyncTask :
cancelling AsyncTask using cancel() API will not make sure that task will stop immediately.
Data lose :
When screen orientation is done. Activity is destroyed and recreated, hence AsysncTask will hold invalid reference of activity and will trouble in updating UI.

Concurrent AsyncTasks: Open Asynctask.java go to line number 199, it shows you can create only 128 concurrent tasks
private static final BlockingQueue<Runnable> sPoolWorkQueue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<Runnable>(128);
Rotation: When Activity is restarted, your AsyncTask’s reference to the Activity is no longer valid, so onPostExecute() will have no effect.
Cancelling AsyncTasks: If you AsyncTask.cancel() it does not cancel your AsyncTask. It’s up to you to check whether the AsyncTask has been canceled or not.
Lifecycle: AsyncTask is not linked with Activity or Fragment, so you have to manage the cancellation of AsyncTask.
There are some workarounds to solve above issues for more details have a look at The Hidden Pitfalls of AsyncTask

I just want to share the information that if you are using Asynctask, it will keep on doing its work even of the activity does not exist.
So in case you have asynctask which starts in onCreate() of the activity, and you rotate the device. At each rotation, a new activity is created with a new instance of Asysntask. So many requests will be send over the network for same task.In this way, a lot of memory will be consumed which effects the app performance resulting in crashing it. So to deal with it Loaders(Asynctask Loaders) are used.
For more info check the video:
Loaders

Pattern for reusing Android AsnycTask over several Activities?

I have several Activity subclasses in my project, each calling a SOAP based web service, processing and displaying the results. The SOAP serialization, the call handling and the parsing of result into various POJO objects is encapsulated in the MyWebService class. This class executes the actual web service call(s) via an AsyncTask.
For being able to pass back the results to the calling Activity subclass, I figured I enforce that all these activities should implement a WebServiceResultProcessor interface, defining a single function (processWebServiceResults) acting as a callback for the AsyncTask, called from onPostExecute.
I also want to display a ProgressDialog during the web service call. And here comes my question. For being able to display the ProgressDialog (either from MyWebService or it's AsyncTask), I need to pass a reference to the caller Activity's Context. And for being able to execute the callback function from the AsyncTask, I also need to pass the same object reference, but this time as a WebServiceResultProcessor. This seems to me a code smell, passing the same object twice, but can't see any way around that. Instead of interfacing, I could create a new base class, extending the Activity class and enforce inheritance from the extension class, but that would mean I'd exclude ListActivity and the likes from using this MyWebService class.
Is there a better way to do this?

+1, a nice question!
This is not a direct answer on your question. However let me say I think AsyncTask is not a right choice for such stuff. I think so because in this case AsyncTask holds a reference to an Activity (via ProgressDialog instance or the callbacks to be called from onPostExecute()).
Just imagine: in Android the OS may kill the Activity before AsyncTask executes its doInBackground(). This is, of course, some sort of a corner case, but it isn't impossible. Consider a scenario: user gets an incoming call, your activity becomes invisible, the OS needs some more RAM and thus it decides to kill your activity. A memory leak case, at least.
I don't know why Google literally hides the info on how UI should be properly separated from background tasks. Yes, they say "use a Service". But it is not a trivial undertaking. It's a pity Google provides nice guides to almost every development topic, but not on this one. Nevertheless I can suggest to check the "Google I/O 2010 - Android REST client applications" presentation for inspiration. Looks like they gave a key on how such things should be done in Android.

You may have a look into this blog article (part 1 and part 2), which implements a web service with AsyncTaskLoader and the same web service with a Service component. Furthermore it shows the differences between both approaches and there are also interesting comments to the article.

Despite Arhimed's warning, I ended up using AsyncTask, as it still fits my purposes. I just make sure that all Activities calling web services, upon their onDestroy(), send a cancel() to the invoked AsyncTask. The AsyncTask implementation itself gracefully handles the cancel request by checking isCancelled() everywhere where necessary.
As for the original question, I must have had a lapse - the solution is really simple. I pass the Activity subclass instance as an Object to the AsyncTask, and cast it to either Context or to WebServiceResultProcessor, as necessary. Fragments showing how it works:
if (callerActivity instanceof Context) {
ProgressDialog dialog = new ProgressDialog((Context)callerActivity);
}
...
if (callerActivity instanceof WebServiceResultProcessor) {
((WebServiceResultProcessor)callerActivity).processWebServiceResults(soapObject);
}

Activity's background thread & configuration change

I have seen some discussion here on Stack Overflow related to using Activity.onRetainNonConfigurationInstance() to maintain a background thread started by one instance of an Activity and pass it to the next instance of the Activity which results, for example, when the phone's orientation changes from portrait to landscape.
The discussions do not specify exactly what can be done with the thread wrapped in the Object returned from onRetainNonConfigurationInstance().
For example:
1. Is there a way to actually keep the background thread running using this technique?
2. Do you need to somehow pause the thread when the previous instance of Activity is going away and then restart it again in the new instance?
Can anyone provide a short example?
Any details would be appreciated.

You can return anything you want to onRetainNonConfigurationInstance(). If you have a Thread that you want passed from one instance of the Activity to another, you can either return it directly, or put it inside another object that you return from onRetainNonConfigurationInstance(). You don't need to pause the thread or interact with it in any way. It just keeps running as if nothing happened.
The only thing you need to be concerned about is how the Thread interacts with the Activity (if at all). If the thread will call the Activity back (to indicate progress or something like that) then you somehow need to give the thread a reference to the new Activity, as the old Activity will be dead.
What do you want to do in your background thread?
EDIT (add more details about threads/activities):
Threads have their own lifetimes which are completely disconnected from Activities. If you create a Thread in an Activity and start it, it will run to completion no matter what your Activity does. The only thing that will stop the thread explicitly is if Android decides to kill your process (which it may do if your process contains no active activities).

The thread will continue to run. For an example of what you can do with this, you can check out the android Ignition project and its IgnitedAsyncTask (and related examples).
The idea is that you will maintain a reference to your thread (usually an AsyncTask) somewhere in your Activity, and occasionally your thread (again, especially if it's an AsyncTask) will require a reference to a Context in order to perform some kind of UI update upon the conclusion of its background task. You will need to make sure that the Context (and anything derived from it--like a TextView or the like) to which your thread has a reference is non-null, or else it will crash.
You might use getLastNonConfigurationInstance() to set your Activity's reference to the thread, and then call a setter on the thread to set its Context reference (to avoid any related null pointer crash).