I cannot figure out how to replace setTargetFragment() in the code sample below, which is from my Preferencesfragment obviously:
override fun onPreferenceStartFragment(
caller: PreferenceFragmentCompat,
pref: Preference
): Boolean {
// Instantiate the new Fragment
val args = pref.extras
val fragment = supportFragmentManager.fragmentFactory.instantiate(
classLoader,
pref.fragment
).apply {
arguments = args
setTargetFragment(caller, 0) // <-- DEPRICATED CODE
}
// Replace the existing Fragment with the new Fragment
supportFragmentManager.beginTransaction()
.replace(R.id.settings, fragment)
.addToBackStack(null)
.commit()
title = pref.title
return true
}
Too many unknowns for my level of knowledge of Android Studio! This reference helps, but still confused:
How to replace setTargetFragment() now that it is deprecated
Well, apparently this works, but I'm not sure that I really understand what is going on:
override fun onPreferenceStartFragment(
caller: PreferenceFragmentCompat,
pref: Preference
): Boolean {
// Instantiate the new Fragment
val args = pref.extras
val fragment: Fragment = supportFragmentManager.fragmentFactory.instantiate(classLoader, pref.fragment)
fragment.arguments = args
supportFragmentManager.beginTransaction().replace(R.id.settings, fragment).addToBackStack(null).commit()
supportFragmentManager.setFragmentResultListener("requestKey", fragment) { _, _ -> }
return true
}
Related
Hey I am very new to tornadofx struggeling with async loading of data for the treeview. I am loading categories from a rest endpoint, which I want to show in there.
It seems like there's no direct data binding to the children.
when using 'bindChildren' I can provide the observable list, but I have to convert them into Node's. which then would make the populate block kind of obsolete.
What's the recommended way of doing this? I cannot find anything about this.
// Category
interface Category<T : Category<T>> {
val id: String
val name: String
val subcategories: List<T>?
}
//default category:
class DefaultCategory(override val name: String) : Category<DefaultCategory> {
override val id: String = "default"
override val subcategories: List<DefaultCategory>? = null
}
//ViewModel
class CategoryViewModel : ViewModel() {
val sourceProperty = SimpleListProperty<Category<*>>()
fun loadData() {
// load items for treeview into 'newItems'
sourceProperty.value = newItems
}
}
// TreeViewFactoryMethod
private fun createTreeView(
listProperty: SimpleListProperty<Category<*>>
): TreeView<Category<*>> {
return treeview {
root = TreeItem(DefaultCategory("Categories"))
isShowRoot = false
root.isExpanded = true
root.children.forEach { it.isExpanded = true }
cellFormat { text = it.name }
populate { parent ->
when (parent) {
root -> listProperty.value
else -> parent.value.subcategories
}
}
}
}
Assuming that on a button click I call viewmodel.loadData(), I would expect the TreeView to update as soon as there's some new data. (If I would've found a way to bind)
I've never had to use bindChildren for TornadoFX before and your use of async isn't very relevant to what I think is your primary problem. So, admittedly, this question kind of confused me at first but I'm guessing you're just wondering why the list isn't appearing in your TreeView? I've made a test example with changes to make it work.
// Category
interface Category<T : Category<T>> {
val id: String
val name: String
val subcategories: List<T>?
}
//default category:
class DefaultCategory(override val name: String) : Category<DefaultCategory> {
override val id: String = "default"
override val subcategories: List<DefaultCategory>? = null
}
//Just a dummy category
class ChildCategory(override val name: String) : Category<ChildCategory> {
override val id = name
override val subcategories: List<ChildCategory>? = null
}
//ViewModel
class CategoryViewModel : ViewModel() {
//filled with dummy data
val sourceProperty = SimpleListProperty<Category<*>>(listOf(
ChildCategory("Categorya"),
ChildCategory("Categoryb"),
ChildCategory("Categoryc"),
ChildCategory("Categoryd")
).asObservable())
fun loadData() {
sourceProperty.asyncItems {
//items grabbed somehow
listOf(
ChildCategory("Category1"),
ChildCategory("Category2"),
ChildCategory("Category3"),
ChildCategory("Category4")
).asObservable()
}
}
}
class TestView : View() {
val model: CategoryViewModel by inject()
override val root = vbox(10) {
button("Refresh Items").action {
model.loadData()
}
add(createTreeView(model.sourceProperty))
}
// TreeViewFactoryMethod
private fun createTreeView(
listProperty: SimpleListProperty<Category<*>>
): TreeView<Category<*>> {
return treeview {
root = TreeItem(DefaultCategory("Categories"))
isShowRoot = false
root.isExpanded = true
root.children.forEach { it.isExpanded = true }
cellFormat { text = it.name }
populate { parent ->
when (parent) {
root -> listProperty
else -> parent.value.subcategories
}
}
}
}
}
There are 2 important distinctions that are important.
1. The more relevant distinction is that inside the populate block, root -> listProperty is used instead of root.listProperty.value. This will make your list appear. The reason is that a SimpleListProperty is not a list, it holds a list. So, yes, passing in a plain list is perfectly valid (like how you passed in the value of the list property). But now that means the tree view isn't listening to your property, just the list you passed in. With that in mind, I would be considerate over the categories' subcategory lists are implemented as well.
2. Secondly, notice the use of asyncItems in the ViewModel. This will perform whatever task asynchronously, then set the items to list on success. You can even add fail or cancel blocks to it. I'd recommend using this, as long/intensive operations aren't supposed to be performed on the UI thread.
I implements my own async, I can't process the exception in a right way. why?
val expected = IllegalStateException();
val it = async<Any> {
throw expected;
};
assert.that({ it.get() }, throws(equalTo(expected)));
// ^--- but it throws a IllegalStateException(cause = expected)
Source Code
interface Response<in T> {
suspend fun yield(value: T);
}
interface Request<out T> {
fun get(): T;
fun <R> then(mapping: (T) -> R): Request<R>;
}
private val executor: ExecutorService = ForkJoinPool(20);
fun <T> async(block: suspend Response<T>.() -> Unit): Request<T> {
return object : Request<T>, Response<T> {
#Volatile var value: T? = null;
var request: Continuation<Unit>? = block.createCoroutine(this, delegate {}).let {
var task: Future<*>? = executor.submit { it.resume(Unit); };
return#let delegate {
try {
val current = task!!;
task = null;
current.get();
} catch(e: ExecutionException) {
throw e.cause ?: e;
}
};
};
override fun <R> then(mapping: (T) -> R): Request<R> = async<R> {
yield(mapping(get()));
};
override fun get(): T {
return value ?: wait();
}
private fun wait(): T {
val it = request!!;
request = null;
it.resume(Unit);
return value!!;
}
suspend override fun yield(value: T) {
this.value = value;
}
};
}
inline fun <T> delegate(noinline exceptional: (Throwable) -> Unit = { throw it; }, crossinline resume: (T) -> Unit): Continuation<T> {
return object : Continuation<T> {
override val context: CoroutineContext = EmptyCoroutineContext;
override fun resumeWithException(exception: Throwable) {
exceptional(exception);
}
override fun resume(value: T) {
resume(value);
}
}
}
the strange behavior is comes from java. the ForkJoinTask#getThrowableException will rethrow exception for the given task:
Returns a rethrowable exception for the given task, if
available. To provide accurate stack traces, if the exception
was not thrown by the current thread, we try to create a new
exception of the same type as the one thrown, but with the
recorded exception as its cause. If there is no such
constructor, we instead try to use a no-arg constructor,
followed by initCause, to the same effect. If none of these
apply, or any fail due to other exceptions, we return the
recorded exception, which is still correct, although it may
contain a misleading stack trace.
which implies that if you don't want to rethrow exception for the give task you can make the exception constructor non-publicly, for example:
val exception = object: IllegalStateException(){/**/};
// ^--- its constructor only available in its scope
I have the following function to access a property's delegate. It uses Kotlin reflection to get a property's name and Java reflection to get the field.
fun Any.getDelegate<T>(prop: KProperty<T>): Any {
return javaClass.getDeclaredField("${prop.name}\$delegate").let {
it.setAccessible(true)
it.get(this)
}
}
The method is used like this:
val delegate = a.getDelegate(A::b)
However, I would prefer to use it like this:
val delegate = a.b.delegate
The problem with the code above is getting the property name of a.b and getting the instance a from a.b. From what I know about Kotlin, this is probably not possible, however I'd like to see if I can clean up my function at all.
To give a bigger picture of what I'm trying do here's my complete code. I want an observable delegate to which I can add and remove observers using the delegate reference and without creating addition variables.
fun Any.addObservable<T>(prop: KProperty<T>, observer: (T) -> Unit) {
getObservableProperty(prop).observers.add(observer)
}
fun Any.getObservableProperty<T>(prop: KProperty<T>): ObservableProperty<T> {
return getDelegate(prop) as ObservableProperty<T>
}
fun Any.getDelegate<T>(prop: KProperty<T>): Any {
return javaClass.getDeclaredField("${prop.name}\$delegate").let {
it.setAccessible(true)
it.get(this)
}
}
class ObservableProperty<T>(
initialValue: T,
initialObservers: Array<(T) -> Unit> = emptyArray()) : ReadWriteProperty<Any?, T> {
private var value = initialValue
public val observers: MutableSet<(T) -> Unit> = initialObservers.toHashSet()
public override fun get(thisRef: Any?, desc: PropertyMetadata): T {
return value
}
public override fun set(thisRef: Any?, desc: PropertyMetadata, value: T) {
this.value = value
observers.forEach { it(value) }
}
}
class A() {
var b by ObservableProperty(0)
}
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
val a = A()
a.addObservable(A::b) {
println("b is now $it")
}
a.b = 1
a.b = 2
a.b = 3
}
Edit:
I just realized that the function also isn't strict because the property delegate field name is referenced by KProperty name, which doesn't require a strong reference to the enclosing class. Here's an example to demonstrate the problem:
class A() {
var foo by ObservableProperty(0)
}
class B() {
var foo by ObservableProperty(0)
}
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
val a = A()
a.addObservable(B::foo) {
println("b is now $it")
}
a.foo = 1
a.foo = 2
a.foo = 3
}
This compiles and runs without error because A::foo and B::foo both result in a field string of "foo$delegate.
Right now reflection is all we can do to get to the delegate object. We are designing a language feature to have direct access to delegate instance, but it's long way to go.
This is how you get the name of a Kotlin Property (although only with an instance of the class). This part will be useful to anyone arriving at this question purely based off its title.
class Stuff(val thing: String)
val stuff = Stuff("cool stuff")
val thingFieldName = "${stuff.thing}\$delegate"
// value of thingFieldName is now "thing"
In terms of getting the delegate itself easier, they say you can now do this:
class Foo {
var bar: String by ReactiveProperty<String>()
}
val foo = Foo()
val bar = foo.bar
val barDelegate = ... // foo.bar$delegate
See ticket.
In Objective-C, I would normally use something like this:
static NSString *kViewTransformChanged = #"view transform changed";
// or
static const void *kViewTransformChanged = &kViewTransformChanged;
[clearContentView addObserver:self
forKeyPath:#"transform"
options:NSKeyValueObservingOptionNew
context:&kViewTransformChanged];
I have two overloaded methods to choose from to add an observer for KVO with the only difference being the context argument:
clearContentView.addObserver(observer: NSObject?, forKeyPath: String?, options: NSKeyValueObservingOptions, context: CMutableVoidPointer)
clearContentView.addObserver(observer: NSObject?, forKeyPath: String?, options: NSKeyValueObservingOptions, kvoContext: KVOContext)
With Swift not using pointers, I'm not sure how to dereference a pointer to use the first method.
If I create my own KVOContext constant for use with the second method, I wind up with it asking for this:
let test:KVOContext = KVOContext.fromVoidContext(context: CMutableVoidPointer)
EDIT: What is the difference between CMutableVoidPointer and KVOContext? Can someone give me an example how how to use them both and when I would use one over the other?
EDIT #2: A dev at Apple just posted this to the forums: KVOContext is going away; using a global reference as your context is the way to go right now.
There is now a technique officially recommended in the documentation, which is to create a private mutable variable and use its address as the context.
(Updated for Swift 3 on 2017-01-09)
// Set up non-zero-sized storage. We don't intend to mutate this variable,
// but it needs to be `var` so we can pass its address in as UnsafeMutablePointer.
private static var myContext = 0
// NOTE: `static` is not necessary if you want it to be a global variable
observee.addObserver(self, forKeyPath: …, options: [], context: &MyClass.myContext)
override func observeValue(forKeyPath keyPath: String?, of object: Any?, change: [NSKeyValueChangeKey: Any]?, context: UnsafeMutableRawPointer?) {
if context == &myContext {
…
}
else {
super.observeValue(forKeyPath: keyPath, of: object, change: change, context: context)
}
}
Now that KVOContext is gone in Xcode 6 beta 3, you can do the following. Define a global (i.e. not a class property) like so:
let myContext = UnsafePointer<()>()
Add an observer:
observee.addObserver(observer, forKeyPath: …, options: nil, context: myContext)
In the observer:
override func observeValueForKeyPath(keyPath: String!, ofObject object: AnyObject!, change: [NSObject : AnyObject]!, context: UnsafePointer<()>) {
if context == myContext {
…
} else {
super.observeValueForKeyPath(keyPath, ofObject: object, change: change, context: context)
}
}
Swift 4 - observing contentSize change on UITableViewController popover to fix incorrect size
I had been searching for an answer to change to a block based KVO because I was getting a swiftlint warning and it took me piecing quite a few different answers together to get to the right solution. Swiftlint warning:
Block Based KVO Violation: Prefer the new block based KVO API with keypaths when using Swift 3.2 or later. (block_based_kvo).
My use case was to present a popover controller attached to a button in a Nav bar in a view controller and then resize the popover once it's showing - otherwise it would be too big and not fitting the contents of the popover. The popover itself was a UITableViewController that contained static cells, and it was displayed via a Storyboard segue with style popover.
To setup the block based observer, you need the following code inside your popover UITableViewController:
// class level variable to store the statusObserver
private var statusObserver: NSKeyValueObservation?
// Create the observer inside viewWillAppear
override func viewWillAppear(_ animated: Bool) {
super.viewWillAppear(animated)
statusObserver = tableView.observe(\UITableView.contentSize,
changeHandler: { [ weak self ] (theTableView, _) in self?.popoverPresentationController?.presentedViewController.preferredContentSize = theTableView.contentSize
})
}
// Don't forget to remove the observer when the popover is dismissed.
override func viewDidDisappear(_ animated: Bool) {
if let observer = statusObserver {
observer.invalidate()
statusObserver = nil
}
super.viewDidDisappear(animated)
}
I didn't need the previous value when the observer was triggered, so left out the options: [.new, .old] when creating the observer.
Update for Swift 4
Context is not required for block-based observer function and existing #keyPath() syntax is replaced with smart keypath to achieve swift type safety.
class EventOvserverDemo {
var statusObserver:NSKeyValueObservation?
var objectToObserve:UIView?
func registerAddObserver() -> Void {
statusObserver = objectToObserve?.observe(\UIView.tag, options: [.new, .old], changeHandler: {[weak self] (player, change) in
if let tag = change.newValue {
// observed changed value and do the task here on change.
}
})
}
func unregisterObserver() -> Void {
if let sObserver = statusObserver {
sObserver.invalidate()
statusObserver = nil
}
}
}
Complete example using Swift:
//
// AppDelegate.swift
// Photos-MediaFramework-swift
//
// Created by Phurg on 11/11/16.
//
// Displays URLs for all photos in Photos Library
//
// #see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30144547/programmatic-access-to-the-photos-library-on-mac-os-x-photokit-photos-framewo
//
import Cocoa
import MediaLibrary
// For KVO: https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Swift/Conceptual/BuildingCocoaApps/AdoptingCocoaDesignPatterns.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014216-CH7-ID12
private var mediaLibraryLoaded = 1
private var rootMediaGroupLoaded = 2
private var mediaObjectsLoaded = 3
#NSApplicationMain
class AppDelegate: NSObject, NSApplicationDelegate {
#IBOutlet weak var window: NSWindow!
var mediaLibrary : MLMediaLibrary!
var allPhotosAlbum : MLMediaGroup!
func applicationDidFinishLaunching(_ aNotification: Notification) {
NSLog("applicationDidFinishLaunching:");
let options:[String:Any] = [
MLMediaLoadSourceTypesKey: MLMediaSourceType.image.rawValue, // Can't be Swift enum
MLMediaLoadIncludeSourcesKey: [MLMediaSourcePhotosIdentifier], // Array
]
self.mediaLibrary = MLMediaLibrary(options:options)
NSLog("applicationDidFinishLaunching: mediaLibrary=%#", self.mediaLibrary);
self.mediaLibrary.addObserver(self, forKeyPath:"mediaSources", options:[], context:&mediaLibraryLoaded)
NSLog("applicationDidFinishLaunching: added mediaSources observer");
// Force load
self.mediaLibrary.mediaSources?[MLMediaSourcePhotosIdentifier]
NSLog("applicationDidFinishLaunching: done");
}
override func observeValue(forKeyPath keyPath: String?, of object: Any?, change: [NSKeyValueChangeKey : Any]?, context: UnsafeMutableRawPointer?) {
NSLog("observeValue: keyPath=%#", keyPath!)
let mediaSource:MLMediaSource = self.mediaLibrary.mediaSources![MLMediaSourcePhotosIdentifier]!
if (context == &mediaLibraryLoaded) {
NSLog("observeValue: mediaLibraryLoaded")
mediaSource.addObserver(self, forKeyPath:"rootMediaGroup", options:[], context:&rootMediaGroupLoaded)
// Force load
mediaSource.rootMediaGroup
} else if (context == &rootMediaGroupLoaded) {
NSLog("observeValue: rootMediaGroupLoaded")
let albums:MLMediaGroup = mediaSource.mediaGroup(forIdentifier:"TopLevelAlbums")!
for album in albums.childGroups! {
let albumIdentifier:String = album.attributes["identifier"] as! String
if (albumIdentifier == "allPhotosAlbum") {
self.allPhotosAlbum = album
album.addObserver(self, forKeyPath:"mediaObjects", options:[], context:&mediaObjectsLoaded)
// Force load
album.mediaObjects
}
}
} else if (context == &mediaObjectsLoaded) {
NSLog("observeValue: mediaObjectsLoaded")
let mediaObjects:[MLMediaObject] = self.allPhotosAlbum.mediaObjects!
for mediaObject in mediaObjects {
let url:URL? = mediaObject.url
// URL does not extend NSObject, so can't be passed to NSLog; use string interpolation
NSLog("%#", "\(url)")
}
}
}
}
Groovy offers some really neat language features for dealing with and implementing Java interfaces, but I seem kind of stuck.
I want to dynamically implement an Interface on a Groovy class and intercept all method calls on that interface using GroovyInterceptable.invokeMethod. Here what I tried so far:
public interface TestInterface
{
public void doBla();
public String hello(String world);
}
import groovy.lang.GroovyInterceptable;
class GormInterfaceDispatcher implements GroovyInterceptable
{
def invokeMethod(String name, args) {
System.out.println ("Beginning $name with $args")
def metaMethod = metaClass.getMetaMethod(name, args)
def result = null
if(!metaMethod)
{
// Do something cool here with the method call
}
else
result = metaMethod.invoke(this, args)
System.out.println ("Completed $name")
return result
}
TestInterface getFromClosure()
{
// This works, but how do I get the method name from here?
// I find that even more elegant than using invokeMethod
return { Object[] args -> System.out.println "An unknown method called with $args" }.asType(TestInterface.class)
}
TestInterface getThisAsInterface()
{
// I'm using asType because I won't know the interfaces
// This returns null
return this.asType(TestInterface.class)
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
def gid = new GormInterfaceDispatcher()
TestInterface ti = gid.getFromClosure()
assert ti != null
ti.doBla() // Works
TestInterface ti2 = gid.getThisAsInterface()
assert ti2 != null // Assertion failed
ti2.doBla()
}
}
Returning the Closure works fine, but I couldn't figure a way to find out the name of the method being called there.
Trying to make a Proxy to the this reference itself (so that method calls will call invokeMethod) returns null.
You could use the Map coercion feature of Groovy to dynamically generate a Map that represents the given interface:
TestInterface getMapAsInterface() {
def map = [:]
TestInterface.class.methods.each() { method ->
map."$method.name" = { Object[] args->
println "Called method ${method.name} with ${args}"
}
}
return map.asType(TestInterface.class)
}
To complete the response of Christoph, as stated by this page, you can implement an interface with a closure. For example:
def map = [doBla: { println 'Bla!'}, hello: {world -> "Hello $world".toString()}] as TestInterface
map.hello 'Groovy' // returns 'Hello Groovy'