Kotlin use Java callback interface - kotlin

I have a WebView. I want to call
public void evaluateJavascript(String script, ValueCallback<String> resultCallback)
this method.
Here is the ValueCallback interface:
public interface ValueCallback<T> {
/**
* Invoked when the value is available.
* #param value The value.
*/
public void onReceiveValue(T value);
};
Here is my kotlin code:
webView.evaluateJavascript("a", ValueCallback<String> {
// cant override function
})
Anyone have idea to override the onReceiveValue method in kotlin?
I tried the "Convert Java to Kotlin" but result is the next:
v.evaluateJavascript("e") { }
Thanks!

The following line is called a SAM conversion:
v.evaluateJavascript("e", { value ->
// Execute onReceiveValue's code
})
Whenever a Java interface has a single method, Kotlin allows you to pass in a lambda instead of an object that implements that interface.
Since the lambda is the last parameter of the evaluateJavascript function, you can move it outside of the brackets, which is what the Java to Kotlin conversion did:
v.evaluateJavascript("e") { value ->
// Execute onReceiveValue's code
}

You already are. The content between your braces is the content of the onReceive function. Kotlin has automatic handling for SAM conversions from Java. All of the following are equivalent.
// Use Kotlin's SAM conversion
webView.evaluateJavascript("a") {
println(it) // "it" is the implicit argument passed in to this function
}
// Use Kotlin's SAM conversion with explicit variable name
webView.evaluateJavascript("a") { value ->
println(value)
}
// Specify SAM conversion explicitly
webView.evalueateJavascript("a", ValueCallback<String>() {
println(it)
})
// Use an anonymous class
webView.evalueateJavascript("a", object : ValueCallback<String>() {
override fun onReceiveValue(value: String) {
println(value)
}
})

Related

How to call constructor default lambda using Kotlin Refelction?

Trying to call lambda provided by MyClass constructor using Kotlin Reflection.
data class MyClass(
var magic:Int=2,
var lambdaValue: ()->String = { //trying to call this lambda from reflection
"Working"
},
)
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
val clazz=MyClass::class
val obj=clazz.createInstance()
val kProperty=clazz.memberProperties
clazz.constructors.forEach{cons-> // for each construtor
cons.parameters.forEach{ parameter-> // looping through constructor parameters
val property=kProperty.find { it.name==parameter.name } // finding the exact property
print(parameter.name+" : ")
if(parameter.type.arguments.isEmpty()) // if empty Int,Float
{
println(property?.get(obj))
}else{
println(property?.call(obj)) // unable to call lambda
}
}
}
}
property.call(obj) returns Any which is not invokable. Any solution?
Expected:
magic : 2
lambdaValue : Working
Frankly speaking, I'm not sure what was your idea behind parameter.type.arguments.isEmpty(). It seems unrelated to what you try to do.
If we have a value of the property already, we can simply check its type and if its is a function then invoke it:
val value = kProperty.find { it.name==parameter.name }!!.get(obj)
print(parameter.name+" : ")
when (value) {
is Function0<*> -> println(value())
else -> println(value)
}
I think usefulness of such a code in generic case isn't very high. This code doesn't know what is the function and if it is going to return a value or perform some action, etc. Maybe in your specific case it is more useful.

Java8 Higher-Order Functions and Kotlin Lambdas interoperability

I have a Java example where a method is implemented as
#Override
public Function<ISeq<Item>, Double> fitness() {
return items -> {
final Item sum = items.stream().collect(Item.toSum());
return sum._size <= _knapsackSize ? sum._value : 0;
};
}
IntelliJ's automatic translation of it to Kotlin is
override fun fitness(): Function<ISeq<Item>, Double> {
return { items:ISeq<Item> ->
val sum = items.stream().collect(Item.toSum())
if (sum.size <= _knapsackSize) sum.value else 0.0
}
}
(I made the type of items explicit and changed return to 0.0)
Still I see that there are compatibility problems with Java's Function and Kotlin native lambdas, but I'm not that the most familiar with these. Error is:
Question is: is it possible to override in Kotlin the external Java library's fitness() method on this example and if so how ?
Problem:
You are returning a (Kotlin) lambda ISeq<Knapsack.Item> -> Double. But this is not what you want. You want to return a Java Function<ISeq<Knapsack.Item>, Double>.
Solution:
You can use a SAM Conversion to create a Function.
Just like Java 8, Kotlin supports SAM conversions. This means that
Kotlin function literals can be automatically converted into
implementations of Java interfaces with a single non-default method,
as long as the parameter types of the interface method match the
parameter types of the Kotlin function.
I created a minimal example to demonstrate that. Consider you have a Java class like this:
public class Foo {
public Function<String, Integer> getFunction() {
return item -> Integer.valueOf(item);
}
}
If you want to override getFunction in Kotlin you would do it like this:
class Bar: Foo() {
override fun getFunction(): Function<String, Int> {
return Function {
it.toInt()
}
}
}
When returning lambda as Java's functional interface, you have to use explicit SAM constructor:
override fun fitness(): Function<ISeq<Item>, Double> {
return Function { items:ISeq<Item> ->
val sum = items.stream().collect(Item.toSum())
if (sum.size <= _knapsackSize) sum.value else 0.0
}
}
Also don't forget to import java.util.function.Function since Kotlin has its own class of that name

Does Kotlin permit extension methods on lambdas?

I'm trying to make a nice SAM-like API for instantiating abstract classes because I don't like object expressions. I'm trying to do something like:
{my lambda code here}.my_extension_function()
Is this possible with Kotlin?
Yes it is possible. The sample code is:
// extension function on lambda with generic parameter
fun <T> ((T) -> Unit).my_extension_function() {
// ...
}
// extension function on lambda without generic parameter
fun (() -> Unit).my_extension_function() {
// ...
}
And use it, for example, like this:
// lambda variable with generic parameter
val lambda: (Int) -> Unit = {
// 'it' contains Int value
//...
}
// lambda variable without generic parameter
val lambda: () -> Unit = {
//...
}
lambda.my_extension_function()
// also we can call extension function on lambda without generic parameter like this
{
//...
}.my_extension_function()
// or with generic parameter
{ i: Int ->
//...
}.my_extension_function()
Note: if you call extension function on lambda without creating a variable and there is a function call before it you need to add semicolon after function call, e.g.:
someFunction();
{
//...
}.my_extension_function()

Passing parameters to a custom getter in kotlin

I have been reading about properties in Kotlin, including custom getters and setters.
However, I was wondering if it is possible to create a custom getter with extra parameters.
For example, consider the following method in Java:
public String getDisplayedValue(Context context) {
if (PrefUtils.useImperialUnits(context)) {
// return stuff
} else {
// return other stuff
}
}
Note that the static method in PrefUtils has to have Context as a parameter, so removing this is not an option.
I would like to write it like this in Kotlin:
val displayedValue: String
get(context: Context) {
return if (PrefUtils.useImperialUnits(context)) {
// stuff
} else {
// other stuff
}
}
But my IDE highlights all of this in red.
I am aware I can create a function in my class to get the displayed value, but this would mean I would have to use .getDisplayedValue(Context) in Kotlin as well instead of being able to refer to the property by name as in .displayedValue.
Is there a way to create a custom getter like this?
EDIT: If not, would it be best to write a function for this, or to pass Context into the parameters of the class constructor?
As far as I know, property getter cannot have parameter. Write a function instead.
You can do this by having a property that returns an intermediate object that has a get and/or set operator with the parameters that you want, rather than returning the value directly.
Having that intermediate object be an inner class instance may be useful for providing easy access to the parent object. However, in an interface you can't use inner classes so in that case you might need to provide an explicit constructor parameter referencing the parent object when constructing your intermediate object.
For instance:
class MyClass {
inner class Foo {
operator fun get(context: Context): String {
return if (PrefUtils.useImperialUnits(context)) {
// return stuff
} else {
// return other stuff
}
}
}
val displayedValue = Foo()
}
...
val context : Context = whatever
val mc : MyClass = whatever
val y: String = mc.displayedValue[context]
You can do for example:
val displayedValue: String by lazy {
val newString = context.getString(R.string.someString)
newString
}

How to specify "own type" as return type in Kotlin

Is there a way to specify the return type of a function to be the type of the called object?
e.g.
trait Foo {
fun bar(): <??> /* what to put here? */ {
return this
}
}
class FooClassA : Foo {
fun a() {}
}
class FooClassB : Foo {
fun b() {}
}
// this is the desired effect:
val a = FooClassA().bar() // should be of type FooClassA
a.a() // so this would work
val b = FooClassB().bar() // should be of type FooClassB
b.b() // so this would work
In effect, this would be roughly equivalent to instancetype in Objective-C or Self in Swift.
There's no language feature supporting this, but you can always use recursive generics (which is the pattern many libraries use):
// Define a recursive generic parameter Me
trait Foo<Me: Foo<Me>> {
fun bar(): Me {
// Here we have to cast, because the compiler does not know that Me is the same as this class
return this as Me
}
}
// In subclasses, pass itself to the superclass as an argument:
class FooClassA : Foo<FooClassA> {
fun a() {}
}
class FooClassB : Foo<FooClassB> {
fun b() {}
}
You can return something's own type with extension functions.
interface ExampleInterface
// Everything that implements ExampleInterface will have this method.
fun <T : ExampleInterface> T.doSomething(): T {
return this
}
class ClassA : ExampleInterface {
fun classASpecificMethod() {}
}
class ClassB : ExampleInterface {
fun classBSpecificMethod() {}
}
fun example() {
// doSomething() returns ClassA!
ClassA().doSomething().classASpecificMethod()
// doSomething() returns ClassB!
ClassB().doSomething().classBSpecificMethod()
}
You can use an extension method to achieve the "returns same type" effect. Here's a quick example that shows a base type with multiple type parameters and an extension method that takes a function which operates on an instance of said type:
public abstract class BuilderBase<A, B> {}
public fun <B : BuilderBase<*, *>> B.doIt(): B {
// Do something
return this
}
public class MyBuilder : BuilderBase<Int,String>() {}
public fun demo() {
val b : MyBuilder = MyBuilder().doIt()
}
Since extension methods are resolved statically (at least as of M12), you may need to have the extension delegate the actual implementation to its this should you need type-specific behaviors.
Recursive Type Bound
The pattern you have shown in the question is known as recursive type bound in the JVM world. A recursive type is one that includes a function that uses that type itself as a type for its parameter or its return value. In your example, you are using the same type for the return value by saying return this.
Example
Let's understand this with a simple and real example. We'll replace trait from your example with interface because trait is now deprecated in Kotlin. In this example, the interface VitaminSource returns different implementations of the sources of different vitamins.
In the following interface, you can see that its type parameter has itself as an upper bound. This is why it's known as recursive type bound:
VitaminSource.kt
interface VitaminSource<T: VitaminSource<T>> {
fun getSource(): T {
#Suppress("UNCHECKED_CAST")
return this as T
}
}
We suppress the UNCHECKED_CAST warning because the compiler can't possibly know whether we passed the same class name as a type argument.
Then we extend the interface with concrete implementations:
Carrot.kt
class Carrot : VitaminSource<Carrot> {
fun getVitaminA() = println("Vitamin A")
}
Banana.kt
class Banana : VitaminSource<Banana> {
fun getVitaminB() = println("Vitamin B")
}
While extending the classes, you must make sure to pass the same class to the interface otherwise you'll get ClassCastException at runtime:
class Banana : VitaminSource<Banana> // OK
class Banana : VitaminSource<Carrot> // No compiler error but exception at runtime
Test.kt
fun main() {
val carrot = Carrot().getSource()
carrot.getVitaminA()
val banana = Banana().getSource()
banana.getVitaminB()
}
That's it! Hope that helps.
Depending on the exact use case, scope functions can be a good alternative. For the builder pattern apply seems to be most useful because the context object is this and the result of the scope function is this as well.
Consider this example for a builder of List with a specialized builder subclass:
open class ListBuilder<E> {
// Return type does not matter, could also use Unit and not return anything
// But might be good to avoid that to not force users to use scope functions
fun add(element: E): ListBuilder<E> {
...
return this
}
fun buildList(): List<E> {
...
}
}
class EnhancedListBuilder<E>: ListBuilder<E>() {
fun addTwice(element: E): EnhancedListBuilder<E> {
addNTimes(element, 2)
return this
}
fun addNTimes(element: E, times: Int): EnhancedListBuilder<E> {
repeat(times) {
add(element)
}
return this
}
}
// Usage of builder:
val list = EnhancedListBuilder<String>().apply {
add("a") // Note: This would return only ListBuilder
addTwice("b")
addNTimes("c", 3)
}.buildList()
However, this only works if all methods have this as result. If one of the methods actually creates a new instance, then that instance would be discarded.
This is based on this answer to a similar question.
You can do it also via extension functions.
class Foo
fun <T: Foo>T.someFun(): T {
return this
}
Foo().someFun().someFun()