In java I can write something like this
final Handler handler = new Handler();
handler.post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
handler.post(this);
}
});
When I write something like this in Kotlin I get a compilation error. this inside of the lambda expression doesn't work like I expect. What can I do?
val handler = Handler()
handler.post{
handler.post(this) // this line throws a compilation error
}
val handler = Handler()
fun doAction() {
handler.post(::doAction) // like `this`
}
handler.post(::doAction)
Although technically Tim's solution also works, but he should post it as an answer, as that one is easier. If he does, accept that one instead.
val handler = Handler()
handler.post(object : Runnable {
override fun run() {
handler.post(this)
}
})
Related
I have a suspend function
private suspend fun getResponse(record: String): HashMap<String, String> {}
When I call it in my main function I'm doing this, but the type of response is Job, not HashMap, how can I get the correct return type?
override fun handleRequest(event: SQSEvent?, context: Context?): Void? {
event?.records?.forEach {
try {
val response: Job = GlobalScope.launch {
getResponse(it.body)
}
} catch (ex: Exception) {
logger.error("error message")
}
}
return null
}
Given your answers in the comments, it looks like you're not looking for concurrency here. The best course of action would then be to just make getRequest() a regular function instead of a suspend one.
Assuming you can't change this, you need to call a suspend function from a regular one. To do so, you have several options depending on your use case:
block the current thread while you do your async stuff
make handleRequest a suspend function
make handleRequest take a CoroutineScope to start coroutines with some lifecycle controlled externally, but that means handleRequest will return immediately and the caller has to deal with the running coroutines (please don't use GlobalScope for this, it's a delicate API)
Option 2 and 3 are provided for completeness, but most likely in your context these won't work for you. So you have to block the current thread while handleRequest is running, and you can do that using runBlocking:
override fun handleRequest(event: SQSEvent?, context: Context?): Void? {
runBlocking {
// do your stuff
}
return null
}
Now what to do inside runBlocking depends on what you want to achieve.
if you want to process elements sequentially, simply call getResponse directly inside the loop:
override fun handleRequest(event: SQSEvent?, context: Context?): Void? {
runBlocking {
event?.records?.forEach {
try {
val response = getResponse(it.body)
// do something with the response
} catch (ex: Exception) {
logger.error("error message")
}
}
}
return null
}
If you want to process elements concurrently, but independently, you can use launch and put both getResponse() and the code using the response inside the launch:
override fun handleRequest(event: SQSEvent?, context: Context?): Void? {
runBlocking {
event?.records?.forEach {
launch { // coroutine scope provided by runBlocking
try {
val response = getResponse(it.body)
// do something with the response
} catch (ex: Exception) {
logger.error("error message")
}
}
}
}
return null
}
If you want to get the responses concurrently, but process all responses only when they're all done, you can use map + async:
override fun handleRequest(event: SQSEvent?, context: Context?): Void? {
runBlocking {
val responses = event?.records?.mapNotNull {
async { // coroutine scope provided by runBlocking
try {
getResponse(it.body)
} catch (ex: Exception) {
logger.error("error message")
null // if you want to still handle other responses
// you could also throw an exception otherwise
}
}
}.map { it.await() }
// do something with all responses
}
return null
}
You can use GlobalScope.async() instead of launch() - it returns Deferred, which is a future/promise object. You can then call await() on it to get a result of getResponse().
Just make sure not to do something like: async().await() - it wouldn't make any sense, because it would still run synchronously. If you need to run getResponse() on all event.records in parallel, then you can first go in loop and collect all deffered objects and then await on all of them.
My apologies for the bad title, I'm fairly new to callbacks and I'm not sure how to explain what I'm trying to achieve.
I have a class called MyClass that has a function connectToService inside of it.
The function connectToService does some calculations and then calls a function with a callback, like this:
fun connectToService() {
//Whatever calculations
val a = 7
var b = 3
var c = a + b
val token = MyToken()
token.actionCallback = object: SuperSecretObject {
override fun onSuccess(asyncActionToken: MyToken) {
c++
}
override fun onFailure(asyncActionToken: MyToken) {
c--
}
}
}
I want to create another class, YourClass which creates an object of MyClass and then calls the connectToService function. When the connectToService function finishes either the onSuccess or onFailurefunctions, I want to do something depending on which one was triggered (something different each time, thats why I can't put it inside the onSuccess or onFailure blocks of code).
Something like this:
//Inside `yourClass`
private fun myFunc() {
val yourClassObj = YourClass()
youClassObj.connectToService {
if(onSuccess)
reinventTheWheel()
else
squareIt()
}
youClassObj.connectToService {
combAWatermelon()
}
youClassObj.connectToService {
sharpenMyHammer()
}
}
Is this possible? If so, how can I achieve it? If it's not, what would be the closest solution to this requirement?
EDIT:
More detailed information has been requested, so while I can't provide exact details, I'll do my best to explain what's going on.
I'm basically working on a library to simplify petitions. For example, MQTT petitions. This is something tht resembles what I want to achieve:
/**
* Subscribes to a list of topics and handles the results
*/
fun subscribe(client: MqttAndroidClient, list: MutableList<String>, onMsg: ((String, MqttMessage)->Unit)?=null, conLost: ((Throwable)->Unit)?=null, delComp: ((IMqttDeliveryToken)->Unit)?=null) {
if (client.isConnected) { //Assert connection
for(x in list.iterator()) { //Subscribe to events
client.subscribe(x, 0)
}
client.setCallback(object : MqttCallback {
override fun connectionLost(cause: Throwable) { //Lost connection
Log.i("TAG", "Connection lost")
conLost?.let { it(cause) }
}
#Throws(java.lang.Exception::class)
override fun messageArrived(topic: String, message: MqttMessage) { //Arrived message
Log.i("TAG", "Message arrived: topic => $topic, message => $message")
onMsg?.let { it(topic, message) }
}
override fun deliveryComplete(token: IMqttDeliveryToken) { //Delivery complete
Log.i("TAG", "Delivery complete")
delComp?.let { it(token) }
}
})
}
}
The messageArrived function must have a behaviour that can be customized depending on the app it's being used on.
For example, on one app I want the onMsg() function to be like this:
when(topic) {
"firstTopic" -> {
localVariable++
}
"secondTopic" -> {
localMethod()
}
"thirdTopic" -> {
localClass.variable.method()
}
}
If I'm using it on an Android device, I'd like to be able to update the interface, doing Android API calls, etc.
I'm not sure I got your question correctly. I think what you are looking for is passing lambdas.
fun connectToService(onSucc: ()->Unit, onFail: ()->Unit) {
//Whatever calculations
MyToken().actionCallback = object: SuperSecretObject {
override fun onSuccess(asyncActionToken: MyToken) {
onSucc()
}
override fun onFailure(asyncActionToken: MyToken) {
onFail()
}
}
}
Then you can call the function like this:
connectToService({ /* Something */ }, { /* Something else */ })
The Code A is from the project architecture-samples, you can see it here.
The updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() is suspend function, so it maybe run asynchronously.
When I call the function getTasks(forceUpdate: Boolean) with the paramter True, I'm afraid that return tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks() will be fired before updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource().
I don't know if the Code B can guarantee return tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks() will be fired after updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource().
Code A
class DefaultTasksRepository(
private val tasksRemoteDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val tasksLocalDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val ioDispatcher: CoroutineDispatcher = Dispatchers.IO
) : TasksRepository {
override suspend fun getTasks(forceUpdate: Boolean): Result<List<Task>> {
// Set app as busy while this function executes.
wrapEspressoIdlingResource {
if (forceUpdate) {
try {
updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource()
} catch (ex: Exception) {
return Result.Error(ex)
}
}
return tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks()
}
}
private suspend fun updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() {
val remoteTasks = tasksRemoteDataSource.getTasks()
if (remoteTasks is Success) {
// Real apps might want to do a proper sync, deleting, modifying or adding each task.
tasksLocalDataSource.deleteAllTasks()
remoteTasks.data.forEach { task ->
tasksLocalDataSource.saveTask(task)
}
} else if (remoteTasks is Result.Error) {
throw remoteTasks.exception
}
}
...
}
Code B
class DefaultTasksRepository(
private val tasksRemoteDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val tasksLocalDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val ioDispatcher: CoroutineDispatcher = Dispatchers.IO
) : TasksRepository {
override suspend fun getTasks(forceUpdate: Boolean): Result<List<Task>> {
// Set app as busy while this function executes.
wrapEspressoIdlingResource {
coroutineScope {
if (forceUpdate) {
try {
updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource()
} catch (ex: Exception) {
return Result.Error(ex)
}
}
}
return tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks()
}
}
...
}
Added Content
To Tenfour04: Thanks!
If somebody implement updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() with lauch just like Code C, are you sure the Code C is return tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks() will be fired after updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() when I call the function getTasks(forceUpdate: Boolean) with the paramter True?
Code C
class DefaultTasksRepository(
private val tasksRemoteDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val tasksLocalDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val ioDispatcher: CoroutineDispatcher = Dispatchers.IO
) : TasksRepository {
override suspend fun getTasks(forceUpdate: Boolean): Result<List<Task>> {
// Set app as busy while this function executes.
wrapEspressoIdlingResource {
if (forceUpdate) {
try {
updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource()
} catch (ex: Exception) {
return Result.Error(ex)
}
}
return tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks()
}
}
private suspend fun updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() {
val remoteTasks = tasksRemoteDataSource.getTasks()
if (remoteTasks is Success) {
// Real apps might want to do a proper sync, deleting, modifying or adding each task.
tasksLocalDataSource.deleteAllTasks()
launch { //I suppose that launch can be fired
remoteTasks.data.forEach { task ->
tasksLocalDataSource.saveTask(task)
}
}
} else if (remoteTasks is Result.Error) {
throw remoteTasks.exception
}
}
}
New Added Content
To Joffrey: Thanks!
I think that the Code D can be compiled.
In this case, when forceUpdate is true, tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks() maybe be run before updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() is done.
Code D
class DefaultTasksRepository(
private val tasksRemoteDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val tasksLocalDataSource: TasksDataSource,
private val ioDispatcher: CoroutineDispatcher = Dispatchers.IO,
private val myCoroutineScope: CoroutineScope
) : TasksRepository {
override suspend fun getTasks(forceUpdate: Boolean): Result<List<Task>> {
// Set app as busy while this function executes.
wrapEspressoIdlingResource {
if (forceUpdate) {
try {
updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource(myCoroutineScope)
} catch (ex: Exception) {
return Result.Error(ex)
}
}
return tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks()
}
}
private suspend fun updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource(myCoroutineScope: CoroutineScope) {
val remoteTasks = tasksRemoteDataSource.getTasks()
if (remoteTasks is Success) {
// Real apps might want to do a proper sync, deleting, modifying or adding each task.
tasksLocalDataSource.deleteAllTasks()
myCoroutineScope.launch {
remoteTasks.data.forEach { task ->
tasksLocalDataSource.saveTask(task)
}
}
} else if (remoteTasks is Result.Error) {
throw remoteTasks.exception
}
}
...
}
suspend functions look like regular functions from the call site's point of view because they execute sequentially just like regular synchronous functions.
What I mean by this is that the instructions following a plain call to a suspend function do not execute until the called function completes its execution.
This means that code A is fine (when forceUpdate is true, tasksLocalDataSource.getTasks() will never run before updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() is done), and the coroutineScope in code B is unnecessary.
Now regarding code C, structured concurrency is here to save you.
People simply cannot call launch without a CoroutineScope receiver.
Since TaskRepository doesn't extend CoroutineScope, the code C as-is will not compile.
There are 2 ways to make this compile though:
Using GlobalScope.launch {}: this will cause the problem you expect, indeed. The body of such a launch will be run asynchronously and independently of the caller. updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource can in this case return before the launch's body is done. The only way to control this is to use .join() on the Job returned by the call to launch (which waits until it's done). This is why it is usually not recommended to use the GlobalScope, because it can "leak" coroutines.
wrapping calls to launch in a coroutineScope {...} inside updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource. This will ensure that all coroutines launched within the coroutineScope block are actually finished before the coroutineScope call completes. Note that everything that's inside the coroutineScope block may very well run concurrently, though, depending on how launch/async are used, but this is the whole point of using launch in the first place, isn't it?
Now with Code D, my answer for code C sort of still holds. Whether you pass a scope or use the GlobalScope, you're effectively creating coroutines with a bigger lifecycle than the suspending function that starts them.
Therefore, it does create the problem you fear.
But why would you pass a CoroutineScope if you don't want implementers to launch long lived coroutines in the provided scope?
Assuming you don't do that, it's unlikely that a developer would use the GlobalScope (or any scope) to do this. It's generally bad style to create long-lived coroutines from a suspending function. If your function is suspending, callers usually expect that when it completes, it has actually done its work.
I'm learning kotlin in intelij Idea, and I have to make presentation about interfaces. One subject is callback, where can I find information about it? or can you tell me simply, veery simply, what's call back?
fun main() {
val myphone = Myphone()
myphone.phoneOn()
myphone.onClick()
myphone.onTouch()
myphone.openApp()
myphone.closeApp()
}
interface Application {
var AppName: String
fun openApp()
fun closeApp() {
println("$AppName App is closed!")
}
}
interface Button {
var helloMessage: String
fun phoneOn()
fun onClick()
fun onTouch() {
println("The screen was touched!")
}
}
class Myphone: Button, Application {
override var AppName: String = "Facebook"
override fun openApp() {
println("$AppName Is Open!")
}
override var helloMessage: String = "Hello"
override fun onClick() {
println("The screen was clicked!")
}
override fun phoneOn() {
println("$helloMessage !")
}
}
VERY simply: callback means the function, that is executed on the other function's finish or some specific event happening.
fun execute() {
// Some logic
executeAnotherOnFinish();
}
OR
// filter executes only after array converted to list
myIntArray.toList().filter { it > 0 }
OR
myListener.notify()
// Listener class methid
notify() {
// Do some work
executeCallback()
}
Callback is not just Kotlin related, its very common programming technique which is primarily used with asynchronous programming. The simplest explanation is that it is function that will be called back (hence the name) once some asynchronous event has occurred.
Button's onClick function is quite good example of that, we have some logic that we need to execute but we want it to run only when button is clicked so we provide callback which will be called once that button is clicked.
I am trying to learn Kotlin coroutines recently I have noticed that in case of map that returns bunch of async IDE is displaying message saying that Function returning Deferred with a name that does not end with async. This is the code I have
runBlocking {
try {
val siteDeferred = async { getSite(order) }
// Place where I get warning-----------| (Function returning Deferred with a name that does not end with Async)
// v
val orderLineDeferred = order.line.map { async { getOrderDetail(it) } }
// Place where I get warning-------------------| (Function returning Deferred with a name that does not end with Async)
// v
val orderLineProductsDeferred = order.line.map { async { getOrderProductInformation(it.productId) } }
val site = siteDeferred.await()
val orderLine = orderLineDeferred.awaitAll()
val orderLineProducts = orderLineProductsDeferred.awaitAll()
} catch (e: Throwable) {
throw Exception(e.message)
}
}
private suspend getOrderDetail(OrderLine orderLine): OrderDetail...
private suspend getSite(Order order): Site ...
private suspend getOrderProductInformation(String productId): Product ...
Am I missing anything here. Furthermore, I would like to know whether this is the right way to do exception handling or not and is there a way to clean up try block so that I can get the value directly even if that means I will have to use async in other methods.
function getSite() renamed to getSiteAsync()，Others functions are modified in this way.