Fix subscriptionLifecycleOwner to use viewLifecycleOwner in Fragment's onCreateView #533
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
elihart
reviewed
Mar 30, 2021
| @@ -211,6 +212,16 @@ interface MvRxView : MavericksView { | |||
| ).toDisposable() | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| private fun Job.toDisposable() = Disposables.fromAction { | |||
| cancel() | |||
| private class JobDisposable(job: Job) : AtomicReference<Job>(job), Disposable { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could you add a unit test for this? 🙏
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added a few simple unit tests here: 8e00379.
| @@ -70,7 +70,11 @@ interface MavericksView : LifecycleOwner { | |||
| * By default [subscriptionLifecycleOwner] is the same as the MvRxView's standard lifecycle owner. | |||
| */ | |||
| val subscriptionLifecycleOwner: LifecycleOwner | |||
| get() = (this as? Fragment)?.viewLifecycleOwnerLiveData?.value ?: this | |||
| get() = try { | |||
| (this as? Fragment)?.viewLifecycleOwner ?: this | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could you add a comment explaining that this is necessary for the view lifecycle to be accessible in onCreateView?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I realized the old doc comment was still suggesting an incorrect fragment implementation so I rephrased it overall and included the how/why of the new implementation: 98afd3f
Tried to still keep it brief there, let me know what you think.
elihart
approved these changes
Mar 31, 2021
| @@ -70,7 +70,11 @@ interface MavericksView : LifecycleOwner { | |||
| * By default [subscriptionLifecycleOwner] is the same as the MvRxView's standard lifecycle owner. | |||
| */ | |||
| val subscriptionLifecycleOwner: LifecycleOwner | |||
| get() = (this as? Fragment)?.viewLifecycleOwnerLiveData?.value ?: this | |||
| get() = try { | |||
| (this as? Fragment)?.viewLifecycleOwner ?: this | |||
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As discussed in #530,
subscriptionLifecycleownerwasn't using a fragment'sviewLifecycleOwnerfor subscriptions made duringonCreateView. The previous implementation usingviewLifecycleOwnerLiveDatadoesn't work there due to the LiveData's value remainingnulluntil the view has been returned. New solution usesviewLifecycleOwnerdirectly when available - exception for accessing too early is caught.Also included is a new wrapper for
Jobinmvrx-rxjava2to better reflect the status of the underlying job in the returnedDisposable'sisDisposed().