StrictMode: Expand Violation classes to contain structured information [187871150]

Fixed

Feature Request

Status Update

No update yet.

Description

il...@google.com

created issue #1

May 11, 2021 10:40PM

Component used: Fragment Version used: 1.4.0-alpha01

Each instance of androidx.fragment.strictmode.Violation tracks a specific type of StrictMode violation. Ideally, each subclass of Violation should have enough structured information (i.e., getters) to allow developers to verify exactly what caused the violation. This could include the Fragment instance itself or violation specific information. This would greatly improve the ability to have custom loggers extract this information and parse it in a useful way.

The base Violation class should have a getFragment() method that returns a NonNull Fragment instance that caused the Violation.

Examples of information I'd expect to be available:

FragmentReuseViolation:
- The unique ID of the previous instance (this may require replacing the private mRemoved flag with a mPreviousWho nullable String).
FragmentTagUsageViolation:
- The parent ViewGroup that the Fragment would have been added to.
RetainInstanceUsageViolation:
- This should be split into two subclasses of RetainInstanceUsageViolation: SetRetainInstanceUsageViolation and GetRetainInstanceUsageViolation to allow distinguishing the two cases
SetUserVisibleHintViolation:
- a boolean indicating on whether the fragment was being set isVisibleToUser or not
TargetFragmentUsageViolation
- This should be separated to subclasses of TargetFragmentUsageViolation:
  - SetTargetFragmentUsageViolation would include the target Fragment instance and the int requestCode
  - GetTargetFragmentUsageViolation (no additional information)
  - GetTargetFragmentRequestCodeUsageViolation (no additional information)
WrongFragmentContainerViolation
- The ViewGroup container that the Fragment was trying to be added to

Comments

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #2May 24, 2021 11:20PM

Seems to be a DNS problem with systems that have 'obtain DNS server address automatically'. Changed my system to a manual setting and the browser etc now work. SDK 2.2 didn't seem to mind the auto setting though.

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #3May 24, 2021 11:20PM

Could you please describe how/where you changed your system to a manual setting?

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #4May 24, 2021 11:20PM

Based on its date, this issue was originally reported before Android 2.3. Because of the many changes that existed in Android 4.x compared to previous versions, it's very likely that this issue doesn't exist in recent versions of Android like 4.2.2 or newer. Because of the high likelihood that this issue is obsolete, it is getting closed automatically by a script, without a human looking at it in detail. If the issue still exists on a Nexus 4 or Nexus 7 running Android 4.2.2 and is not related to Google applications, please open a new report accordingly.

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #5May 25, 2021 10:21PM

java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unable to locate adb
at com.android.tools.idea.run.editor.DeployTargetPickerDialog.<init>(DeployTargetPickerDialog.java:144)
at com.android.tools.idea.run.editor.ShowChooserTargetProvider.showPrompt(ShowChooserTargetProvider.java:113)
at com.android.tools.idea.run.AndroidRunConfigurationBase.getDeployTarget(AndroidRunConfigurationBase.java:600)
at com.android.tools.idea.run.AndroidRunConfigurationBase.doGetState(AndroidRunConfigurationBase.java:281)
at com.android.tools.idea.run.AndroidRunConfigurationBase.getState(AndroidRunConfigurationBase.java:241)
at com.intellij.execution.runners.ExecutionEnvironment.getState(ExecutionEnvironment.java:158)
at com.intellij.execution.runners.BaseProgramRunner.execute(BaseProgramRunner.java:55)
at com.intellij.execution.runners.BaseProgramRunner.execute(BaseProgramRunner.java:50)
at com.intellij.execution.ProgramRunnerUtil.executeConfigurationAsync(ProgramRunnerUtil.java:92)
at com.intellij.execution.ProgramRunnerUtil.executeConfiguration(ProgramRunnerUtil.java:41)
at com.intellij.execution.impl.ExecutionManagerImpl.restart(ExecutionManagerImpl.java:93)
at com.intellij.execution.impl.ExecutionManagerImpl.access$300(ExecutionManagerImpl.java:44)
at com.intellij.execution.impl.ExecutionManagerImpl$3.run(ExecutionManagerImpl.java:442)
at com.intellij.util.concurrency.QueueProcessor.runSafely(QueueProcessor.java:232)
at com.intellij.util.Alarm$Request.runSafely(Alarm.java:356)
at com.intellij.util.Alarm$Request.run(Alarm.java:343)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266)
at com.intellij.util.concurrency.SchedulingWrapper$MyScheduledFutureTask.run(SchedulingWrapper.java:228)
at com.intellij.openapi.application.TransactionGuardImpl$2.run(TransactionGuardImpl.java:315)
at com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.LaterInvocator$FlushQueue.doRun(LaterInvocator.java:435)
at com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.LaterInvocator$FlushQueue.runNextEvent(LaterInvocator.java:419)
at com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.LaterInvocator$FlushQueue.run(LaterInvocator.java:403)
at java.awt.event.InvocationEvent.dispatch(InvocationEvent.java:311)
at java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEventImpl(EventQueue.java:762)
at java.awt.EventQueue.access$500(EventQueue.java:98)
at java.awt.EventQueue$3.run(EventQueue.java:715)
at java.awt.EventQueue$3.run(EventQueue.java:709)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(ProtectionDomain.java:80)
at java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEvent(EventQueue.java:732)
at com.intellij.ide.IdeEventQueue.defaultDispatchEvent(IdeEventQueue.java:755)
at com.intellij.ide.IdeEventQueue._dispatchEvent(IdeEventQueue.java:704)
at com.intellij.ide.IdeEventQueue.dispatchEvent(IdeEventQueue.java:391)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpOneEventForFilters(EventDispatchThread.java:201)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForFilter(EventDispatchThread.java:116)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForHierarchy(EventDispatchThread.java:105)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(EventDispatchThread.java:101)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(EventDispatchThread.java:93)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.run(EventDispatchThread.java:82)

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #6May 25, 2021 10:21PM

voilà ce qu'on m'affiche lorsque j’exécute mon programme

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #7May 25, 2021 10:21PM

je ne vois pas comment résoudre ce problème. svp aidez moi

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #8May 25, 2021 10:23PM

Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-main

commit 260563499d2b7f8a5c9e0fd5d4b66eb9f1697609
Author: Sanura N'Jaka <sanura@google.com>
Date: Thu May 20 01:27:28 2021

Expand WrongFragmentContainerViolation to contain
the ViewGroup container that the Fragment was trying
to be added to

Expanding WrongFragmentContainerViolation to contain
the ViewGroup container that the Fragment causing the
violation was trying to be added to. This will be
helpful in error messging.

RelNote: "`WrongFragmentContainerViolation` now contains
the `ViewGroup` container that the `Fragment` causing the
violation was trying to be added to."

Bug: 187871150
Test: ./gradlew checkApi
Change-Id: I83c75a2b30f2defef7868e6d1b1d7ea63e576c57

M fragment/fragment/api/current.txt
M fragment/fragment/api/public_plus_experimental_current.txt
M fragment/fragment/api/restricted_current.txt
M fragment/fragment/src/main/java/androidx/fragment/app/FragmentStateManager.java
M fragment/fragment/src/main/java/androidx/fragment/app/strictmode/FragmentStrictMode.java
M fragment/fragment/src/main/java/androidx/fragment/app/strictmode/WrongFragmentContainerViolation.java

https://android-review.googlesource.com/1713430

jb...@google.com <jb...@google.com> #9May 26, 2021 11:45PM

Marked as fixed.

This has been fixed internally and will be available in the Fragment 1.4.0-alpha02 release.