Fixed
Status Update
No update yet.
Comments
il...@google.com
ap...@google.com
Yigit, do you have time to fix it?
reemission of the same liveData is racy
reemission of the same liveData is racy
ma...@gmail.com
Thanks for the detailed analysis. This may not be an issue anymore since we've started using Main.immediate there but I' not sure; I'll try to create a test case.
ap...@google.com
just emitting same live data reproduces the issue.
@Test
fun raceTest() {
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData)
emitSource(subLiveData) //crashes
}
subject.addObserver().apply {
testScope.advanceUntilIdle()
}
}
@Test
fun raceTest() {
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData)
emitSource(subLiveData) //crashes
}
subject.addObserver().apply {
testScope.advanceUntilIdle()
}
}
il...@google.com
With 2.2.0-alpha04 (that use Main.immediate), the issue seems to be still there (I tested it by calling emitSource() twice, like your test case)
ih...@gmail.com
yea sorry immediate does not fix it.
I actually have a WIP fix for it:
https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/frameworks/support/+/1112186
if your case is the one i found (emitting same LiveData multiple times, as shown in #5) you can work around it by adding a dummy transformation.
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it })
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it} )
}
I actually have a WIP fix for it:
if your case is the one i found (emitting same LiveData multiple times, as shown in #5) you can work around it by adding a dummy transformation.
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it })
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it} )
}
Description
Version used: 1.2.0-alpha03
Devices/Android versions reproduced on: All
I used the OpenDocuments contract in my project, everything works fine if more than one file is selected in the called explorer.
But if you select only one (which the system does not prohibit) - the contract returns null in response.
I create my own, it seems to me a logical workaround for this situation, but I would like to see this solution out of the box: