I am trying to initialize String values in ViewModel and cannot find proper solutions for this situation. The intended operation is as follows:
There is a string value on ViewModel and real value on Proto Datastore.
Initialize a string value with existing value saved at Proto Datastore.
Change a string value on ViewModel. (NOT applying change to Proto Datastore in this step!)
If changing string value completed, request Proto Datastore to apply string values on real values.
class MainViewModel(private val repository: DataRepository) : ViewMode() {
private val _stringValue = MutableStateFlow("") // trying to initialize this value
fun setStringValue(value: String) {
viewModelScope.launch {
repository.setStringValue(value)
}
}
}
message Data {
string stringValue = 1;
}
I tried initializing string value on Composable, because currently I am using Flow and Flow.collectAsState() method is only avaliable on #Composable annotated function. But it has critical problem that when every recomposition happens, string value is initialized with unintended values, too.
So I changed the way and trying to initialize it on ViewModel. But cannot find proper way on Google to do this.
Related
I want to retrieve single object from Room database, so i have this method in Dao
// in Dao
#Query("SELECT * FROM table_foo ORDER BY RANDOM()")
fun getSingleFoo(): Flow<FooEntity>
That object then will be mapped into others model, let say PlainFoo.
// in Repository
fun getRandomFoo(): Flow<PlainFoo> = dao.getSingleFoo()
.map(FooEntity::asExternalModel)
But in the first launch of this app, the table is empty. It makes the dao function return null and trigger NPE when being mapped. I try to wrap it inside a sealed interface like this.
// Result.kt as wrapper
sealed interface Result<out T> {
data class Success<T>(val data: T) : Result<T>
data class Error(val exception: Throwable? = null) : Result<Nothing>
}
fun <T> Flow<T>.asResult(): Flow<Result<T>> = this
.map<T, Result<T>> {
Result.Success(it)
}
.catch {
emit(Result.Error(it))
}
And then i call this method in the presentation layer like this.
// in ViewModel
val randomFoo = fooRepository.getRandomFoo().asResult()
// in activity, log only for checking
lifecycleScope.launch {
viewModel.randomFoo.collect {
Timber.tag("RandomFooFlow").d("$it")
}
}
It catches the error, which look like this.
Error(exception=java.lang.NullPointerException: Parameter specified as non-null is null: method kotlin.jvm.internal.Intrinsics.checkNotNullParameter, parameter <this>)
But when new data is inserted, it does not get updated unless i reopen the app (which means new Flow is being collected, not the old one). So it seems that the flow is cancelled.
Is there any way to handle this without making my Dao return a
nullable object?
Note: if the data is already populated when opening the app, the flow is able to keep consuming new value).
Instead of dealing with exceptions, I would suggest to return nullable types from your Dao. You can then also update your mapper function to handle the type nullability. You won't need to wrap it into any Result class, just a simple null check on the UI end would suffice.
// Dao
#Query("SELECT * FROM table_foo ORDER BY RANDOM()")
fun getSingleFoo(): Flow<FooEntity?>
// Repo
fun getRandomFoo(): Flow<PlainFoo?> = dao.getSingleFoo().map { it?.asExternalModel() }
Could you please call repository getRandomFoo() method from inside coroutine in view model ? And also you need to call response with data observe like LiveData or StateFlow. By the way, you can wrap your result with wrap inside repository. In code example, I do not care about it because your error is not related with mapping.
View Model
private val _stateFlow = MutableStateFlow()
val stateFlow:StateFlow
fun getRandom(){
fooRepository.getRandomFoo().onEach{
if(it is Result.Success){
stateFlow.value = it
}
}.launchIn(viewModelScope)
}
Fragment or activity
viewLifecycleOwner.lifecycle.repeatOnLifecycle{
stateFlow.collect{
// Listen data for your UI
}
}
Reasoning:
Hello guys. I'm building an evolution simulator as personal project. I have a few parameters set on textfields, such as the speed of the simulation and the number of "organisms". These are going to be accessed by multiple components of the application. Because i would also like to use validation on a few parameters, I set up a ViewModel like such:
class ParametersModel: ViewModel() {
// These properties would likely be DoubleProperty, but for simplicity lets pretend they are strings
val simulationSpeed = bind { SimpleStringProperty() }
val organismsGenerated = bind { SimpleStringProperty() }
}
... and then perform the validation tests on the textfields:
val model = ParametersModel()
textfield(model.simulationSpeed).required()
This works alright, but the issue with it is that I'm defining the model properties as a bind to an empty SimpleDoubleProperty, which is redundant since I'm never commiting this model (the program should always read changes as they are typed). At the same time, I cant define the model properties as simply:
class ParametersModel: ViewModel() {
val simulationSpeed = SimpleStringProperty()
val organismsGenerated = SimpleStringProperty()
}
Because I then get an error about the validation:
The addValidator extension can only be used on inputs that are already bound bidirectionally to a property in a Viewmodel. Use validator.addValidator() instead or make the property's bean field point to a ViewModel.
The other option I could take would be to make a class named something like GlobalProperties, which would keep my properties and also a ValidationContext. I could then add validators by using validationContext.addValidator and pass the textfields. But at this point I feel I'm just coding a ViewModel equivalent.
Question:
Is ViewModel the correct way of keeping "globally" accessed parameters set by textfields? If so, is there a way to not have to set the model properties as a bind of an empty one, since i dont ever need to commit anything?
Usually you would use a ViewModel with some sort of model. Then you can use the ViewModel to handle user input, which stores the current state of the user input, and the backing model will only be update when the ViewModel is committed, assuming validation passes (which seems at odds with your claim that you "dont ever need to commit anything").
Something like this:
class Parameters {
val simulationSpeedProperty = SimpleStringProperty(...)
var simulationSpeed by simulationSpeedProperty
val organismsGeneratedProperty = SimpleStringProperty(...)
var organismsGenerated by organismsGeneratedProperty
}
class ParametersModel(parameters: Parameters): ItemViewModel<Parameters>(parameters) {
val simulationSpeed = bind(Parameters::simulationSpeedProperty)
val organismsGenerated = bind(Parameters::organismsGeneratedProperty)
}
Then you can be sure that the Parameters backing the ParametersModel always has valid values in it (assuming of course it was initialized with valid values).
I want to serialize FAIL object via Jackson:
interface OptionalResult<out ResultType : Any> {
val data: ResultType?
object FAIL : OptionalResult<Nothing> {
override val data: Nothing? = null
}
}
What I get is {} but I expect to receive {"data": null}.
How can I fix my object?
By the way, the following object is serialized properly:
object FAIL : OptionalResult<Int> {
override val data: Int? = null
}
Technical problem is that Jackson determines that indicator that would normally indicate existence of a property (public or annotated setter) will be filtered out, as getter is seen as public void getData() that returns nothing.
Filtering is done at low level processing, along with removal of static methods, methods that are neither annotated nor follow naming convention and so on.
It might be possible to improve upon this detection since there is actual difference between void and Void (similar to primitive/Wrapper difference).
But this is the first time such usage has been reported.
One thing that you could try which may (or might not) help: add #JsonProperty for val data. It could help if filtering is only done for non-annotated accessors.
I am developing a simple Android app, that will display an icon of a vehicle and the user can click on the icon to display the vehicle information. I want to load the data dynamically when I build the app i.e. the data will come from an external source including the picture for the icon.
I am new to Kotlin and not sure what to search for to understand a suitable solution. What is the correct way to define the data, is it best to create an class as below then create an array of the class (not sure if this is possible)
public class VehicleSpec()
{
var OEM: String? = null
var ModelName: String? = null
var EngineSize: String? = null
}
Or would be better to create a multiple dimension array and then link the data to the cells?
var VehicleSpec = arrayOf(20,20)
VehicleSpec[0][0] = Null //OEM
VehicleSpec[0][1] = Null //ModelName
VehicleSpec[0][2] = Null //EngineSize
What is the best way to set up the data storage, is there any good references to understand how this should be setup?
What is the correct way to define the data, is it best to create an class as below then create an array of the class
Using an array for the properties of an object is not making the full use of the type safety you have in Kotlin (and even Java for that matter).
If what you want to express is multiple properties of an object, then you should use a class to define those properties. This is especially true if the properties have different types.
There is no performance difference between an array and a class, because you'll get a reference to the heap in both cases. You could save on performance only if you convert your multi-dimensional array approach to a single-dimension array with smart indexing. Most of the time, you should not consider this option unless you are handling a lot of data and if you know that performance is an issue at this specific level.
(not sure if this is possible)
Defining lists/arrays of classes is definitely possible.
Usually, for classes that are only used as data containers, you should prefer data classes, because they give you useful methods for free, and these methods totally make sense for simple "data bags" like in your case (equals, hashcode, component access, etc.).
data class Vehicle(
val OEM: String,
val ModelName: String,
val EngineSize: String
)
Also, I suggest using val instead of var as much as possible. Immutability is more idiomatic in Kotlin.
Last but not least, prefer non-null values to null values if you know a value must always be present. If there are valid cases where the value is absent, you should use null instead of a placeholder value like empty string or -1.
First at all, using the "class aprocah" makes it easy for you to understand and give you the full benefits of the language itself... so dont dry to save data in an array .. let the compiler handle those stuff.
Secondly i suggest you have maybe two types (and use data classes ;-) )
data class VehicleListEntry(
val id: Long,
val name: String
)
and
data class VehicleSpec(
val id: Long,
val oem: String = "",
val modelName: String = "",
val engineSize: String = ""
)
from my perspective try to avoid null values whenever possible.
So if you have strings - which you are display only - use empty strings instead of null.
and now have a Model to store your data
class VehicleModel() {
private val specs: MutableMap<Long, VehicleSpec> = mutableMapOf()
private var entries: List<VehicleListEntry> = listOf()
fun getSpec(id: Long) = specs[id]
fun addSpec(spec: VehicleSpec) = specs[spec.id] = spec
fun getEntries(): List<VehicleListEntry> = entries
fun setEntries(data: List<VehicleListEntry>) {
entries = data.toMutableList()
}
}
You could also use a data class for your model which looks like
data class VehicleModel(
val specs: MutableMap<Long, VehicleSpec> = mutableMapOf(),
var entries: List<VehicleListEntry> = listOf()
)
And last but not least a controller for getting stuff together
class VehicleController() {
private val model = VehicleModel()
init{
// TODO get the entries list together
}
fun getEntries() = model.entries
fun getSpec(id: Long) : VehicleSpec? {
// TODO load the data from external source (or check the model first)
// TODO store the data into the model
// TODO return result
}
}
Using DynamoDBMapper within an AWS Lambda (i.e. not Android) written in Kotlin, I can save a record using a data class. However when I attempt to load a record to a data class, I receive a "DynamoDBMappingException: could not instantiate class" exception.
#DynamoDBTable(tableName = "Test")
data class TestItem(
#DynamoDBHashKey(attributeName="someKey")
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "someKey")
var someKey: String?,
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "someValue")
var someValue: String?
}
val ddbMapper = DynamoDBMapper(AmazonDynamoDBClientBuilder.defaultClient())
ddbMapper.load(TestItem::class.java, "xyz")
Results in the following exception:
com.amazonaws.services.dynamodbv2.datamodeling.DynamoDBMappingException:
could not instantiate class
com.intuit.connect_to_pro.lambda_common_core.aws_service.TestItem
With the root exception being:
java.lang.NoSuchMethodException:
com.intuit.connect_to_pro.lambda_common_core.aws_service.TestItem.()
AWS has an example for Android that uses com.amazonaws.mobileconnectors.dynamodbv2.dynamodbmapper.DynamoDBMapper instead of com.amazonaws.services.dynamodbv2.datamodeling.DynamoDBMapper. I tried the Android version, but the result was the same.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aws-mobile/latest/developerguide/add-aws-mobile-nosql-database.html
Any help would be appreciated.
The DynamoDBMapper expects a class with an empty constructor. Using a Kotlin data class, you can specify default values for all parameters and use #JvmOverload, which will generate the empty constructor for JVM (Java). Also all parameters need to be mutable, so you need to use "var" instead of "val".
#DynamoDBTable(tableName = "Test")
data class TestItem #JvmOverloads constructor(
#DynamoDBHashKey(attributeName="someKey")
var someKey: String = "",
var someValue: String = ""
)
Make sure that all your classes have an empty constructor. In my case I had nested documents. Those had to have empty constructors too.
In Kotlin, an empty (parameterless) constructor will be created if you specify default values for all the attributes.
Also, make sure that the data from the db can be converted to the data in your classes.
For example, mine failed because I had an Integer property in my class while in the db I had a String. i.e. I had the String value "30" in the db, instead of the Integer value 30.