Develop Reference

Using a no-fragment activity instead of a one-fragment activity

While peer reviewing a colleague's code I noticed she created a new Activity and all functionality is just there without a Fragment.
In the old days of Android, this is what we did, but the last few years I and my peers always took the approach that every Activity should have at least one Fragment and no actual code should be written in the Activity apart from loading the Fragment of-course and maybe some higher end procedures.
I want to argue for always using at least one Fragment in every Activity, but I couldn't find compelling arguments about why it is better than a no-fragment Activity.
The out of the box argument I can think of is that it will be easier adding new fragments if needed, but if we know this will never be a necessity, why bother with a single fragment Activity?

Fragment is easier to extend and test, if you are writing another new feature, it is helpful for separating code. And you can also move your fragment code to another place easy.
Of cource, if you are sure that your code is very simple and stable, like demo or temp test code, you can also use Activity without fragment.

preserving Singleton DB data on rotation Without using ContentProvider (Android)

How do you preserve singleton database data in an activity after a screen rotation without using Content Provider or loaders?
This was an interview question I got stumped on.
ContentProvider with cursor loader was my first thought, but they said they didn't want that. Then I thought of saving the cursor returned from the singleton DB's query method, but I couldn't "put" a cursor in the out bundle in OnSavedInstance, so I have no idea.
I also asked them "isn't using a singleton database discouraged?" to which they said "yes, but this is just for interview purposes."
Maybe this can help someone in the future who encounters this question.

"In an activity" sounds like I'm not allowed to pass all the stuff to the application class (which will not be destroyed on screen rotation). But just in case this is an option:
You write your own class which extends from Application. The official documentation tells you how to do it but states that you basically don't need to. Having said that, this Stack Overflow post is a collection of possible exceptions from the rule.
In the Activity, you access it like this:
MyApplication app = (MyApplication)getApplication();
But personally I'd keep data for one Activity not in the Application class but inside a retained Fragment. They survive configuration changes but keep in mind that they are not part of the back stack. So if you have a savedInstanceState != null, the retained Fragment may nevertheless have been recreated in its initial state e.g. if the app has been paused for a while.
The guide on Handling Configuration Changes shows how to use retained Fragments

You can use fragments and use Fragment#setRetainInstance(true) for that. And all the data should be saved across configuration changes. Note that a retained fragment is not visual its placed along your Activity or Fragment This might help you: https://www.androiddesignpatterns.com/2013/04/retaining-objects-across-config-changes.html

Android - Create Application level fragment

For my current project, I will be using this SlidingUpPanel library.
The sliding up panel will host a fragment that will contain application/global level information. This panel will be in every activity in my application. This will be very similar to the way Google Play music works.
My question is, what is the best way to persist the sliding up panel fragment throughout my application? I see myself going about this in two ways...
Storing the fragment inside the Application class and loading it at the start of every activity (somehow, not even sure if this is a possibility).
Storing the data that it will display in the Application class & loading a new instance of the fragment, passing in the persisted data.
Which one of these two ways would be the best? Is 1. even possible? Are there any coding landmines with these approaches?

Storing a fragment to persist throughout the application lifecycle would be pretty unorthodox, mainly because the fragment class should be able to follow it's normal lifecycle events (in this case, mainly onPause and onResume) instead of being stuck somewhere in the application class.
It is definitely common practice to store the data and load it each time you display the fragment. If you want to enable some sort of cacheing or singleton pattern to access the data, it should most likely be with another object that the fragment can access but is not a member within the fragment.
There is a good video from google about leaking views and it touches briefly on the pitfalls of doing some similar to what you're proposing in bullet #1.

I think the structure of your app looks like it should be a single activity where that bar is in it, then the main content is a Fragment that you replace and use addToBackStack on in order to maintain the use of the back button. Otherwise, you are going to have a lot of repeated code with solution 2 (which means a lot of repeated work in the case of bugs etc., not very maintainable), or leak views using solution 1.
More info on providing a proper back implementation

Should we be using setTargetFragment()? I thought Fragments should not be communicating with each other

The android developer tutorials recommend me using the host activities of fragments to pass around data and whatnot, so why is there a set/get target fragment method?
My application thus far contains a host activity, and a fragment, which has a button that launches a DialogFragment, in which there is a button that launches ANOTHER DialogFragment. Using setTargetFragment/getTargetFragment has made this whole ordeal somewhat confusing though, so I am thinking of reimplementing to let my main activity handle DialogFragment.show methods through my main fragment's custom interface.
Is this the right way of thinking? Or is there no harm in using setTargetFragment? Can anyone provide good and bad examples of using it?

Also, you may end up with exception of no target fragment found in fragment manager. This happens if after rotation (or other config change) your target fragment will not be readded to the fragment manager by the time when caller fragment will be adding.
Imagine you have some sort of Confirmation fragment which you add from MainFragment as so:
ConfirmationFragment frag = new ConfirmationFragment();
frag.setTargetFragment(this, 0);
getFragmentManager().beginFragmentTransaction().add(R.id.container, frag).commit();
Now on some confirmation button click you invoke a method from MainFragment by calling:
((MainFragment)this.getTargetFragment()).onUserSelectedGoodButton();
This is pretty and simple, but if you will rotate the screen and for some reason ConfirmationFragment will be added to FragmentManager before MainFragment, exception will be thrown, stating that target fragment is not found in the fragment manager

I don't think there is implicit harm in using setTargetFragment, however, I would only use it in very specific circumstances. For example, if the target fragment is only going to ever be used by the fragment (taking into account object reuse and designing your classes to be reusable when possible) and even then, sparingly.
By using them too much, you will end up with what you're seeing - confusing code that is hard to follow and maintain. On the outset, by marshaling everything through your activity you maintain a "flat" hierarchy that is simple to follow and maintain.
I think the decision to use setTargetFragment or not is a coding-style/philosophical one that, with wisdom and experience, it "feels" right or wrong. Maybe on your case, by evidence that you are questioning your older code, you are gaining that wisdom :)

Fragment not instantiating correctly

I'm having a problem instantiating Fragments in my program using the Support Library implementation. Here's a brief description of the task I'm attempting to perform and some of my attempts which haven't yet borne fruit:
The UI of my application is subject to change to meet user preferences. In order to do this, I'm using a Fragment for each different layout and replacing the active Fragment in the UI at a given time as per the user's instructions. Here are some ways I've tried (and failed) to do this:
I've tried adding the Fragments as non-static inner classes in my Activity. This approach worked so long as the user did not rotate the device. As soon as the user rotated the device, the application crashed (this is true for Portrait -> Landscape rotation and for Landscape -> Portrait rotation). Upon checking the issue using the emulator, I was getting an InstantiationException. I checked SO for some help, which led me to:
Implement the Fragment as a static inner class. When the Fragment initiates, it will expand its layout, and then from later in the control flow of the Activity, I can do stuff to the Fragment's subviews (in particular, add listeners to the buttons). Unfortunately this didn't work because I couldn't refer to the Fragment's subviews using [frag_name].getView().findViewById(). Something about referencing static objects in a non-static context. Once again, I checked SO, which led me to:
Implement the Fragment as a separate class altogether from the Activity. This seems to be what the Dev docs on developer.android.com recommend. Upon doing this, everything seems to compile fine, but when I try to refer to the Fragment's subviews (once again, using [frag_name].getView().findViewById()), I get a NullPointerException. When I add System.out.println() statements across my code to find out exactly what is happening, I find that the print statement inside onCreateView in the fragment is never getting fired, which implies that onCreateView is never getting triggered.
So now, I'm stuck. What am I doing wrong? The precise implementation of this isn't as important as learning something from the experience so I can get better at Android development, so if seperate classes are better than static classes or vice-versa, I don't really care which I use.
Thanks.

Figured it out. Turns out that in order to do what I wanted, I had to register the Activity as a Listener to each of the Fragments and pass "ready to enable buttons" messages back and forth between the two. To anyone using this question for further research, the guide on how to do that is located on the Android Developer guide, here: http://developer.android.com/training/basics/fragments/communicating.html