I'm developing a mobile puzzle game in Unity, when I exit my game to the home screen and return back- the game continues from the same spot and it seems to be fine (without overriding onPause/onStart), am I missing something? Do I need to store variables when exit? What do people usually save? I'm afraid to have bugs in the future.
I missing something?
Yes
Do I need to store variables when exit?
Yes
I'm afraid to have bugs in the future.
Yes, you will. You will run into lost variables issues. It is your responsibly to implement this. Just because everything looks and works fine now doesn't mean anything. The behavior is different on different platforms and devices and also depends on how many apps are already running on the background + current available ram. Usually, you use a class to store all important variables in your class then serialize and save them.
See this post that explains how to do this and provides a wrapper to easily save and load any class. You have to save your game state when Unity is about to be interrupted. These are the functions that can be used to detect this and you must know about:
OnApplicationQuit()
OnApplicationPause(bool)
OnApplicationFocus(bool)
You have to decide which ones to use to save the data. Sometimes, you must use multiple of them due to the behavior of each one in each platform. It's worth reading the Doc on each one to understand what they do on each platform.
I'm reading this article on how to : correctly retain variable state in Android and I'm reminded that I've never gotten a good answer (and can't find one here) for why it's better to tussle with the Bundle (which isn't a HUGE hassle, but definitely has its limitations) rather than just always have an Application overridden in your App, and just store all your persistent data members there. Is there some leakage risk? Is there a way that the memory can be released unexpectedly? I'm just not clear on this... it SEEMS like it's a totally reliable "attic" to all the Activities, and is the perfect place to store anything that you're worried might be reset when the user turns the device or suspends the app.
Am I wrong on this? Would love to get some clarity on what the true life cycle of the memory is in the Application.
Based on the answers below, let me extend my question.
Suppose I have an app that behaves differently based on an XML file that it loads at startup.
Specifically, the app is a user-info gathering app, and depending on the XML settings it will follow an open ended variety of paths (collecting info A, but not J, and offering Survey P, followed by an optional PhotoTaking opportunity etc.)
Ideally I don't have to store the details of this behavior path in a Bundle (god forbid) or a database (also ugly, but less so). I would load the XML, process it, and have the Application hold onto that structure, so I can refer to it for what to do next and how. If the app is paused and the Application is released, it's not *THAT big a hassle to check for null in my CustomFlow object (that is generated as per the XML) and re-instantiate it. It doesn't sound like this would happen all that often, anyway. Would this be a good example of where Application is the *best tool?
The question as to which method is better largely depends upon what information you are storing and need access to and who (which components, packages, etc.) needs access to that information. Additionally, settings like launchMode and configChanges which alter the lifecycle can help you to determine which method is best for you.
First, let me note, that I am a huge advocate for extending the Application object and often extend the Application class, but take everything stated here in its context as it is important to understand that there are circumstances where it simply is not beneficial.
On the Lifecycle of an Application: Chubbard mostly correctly stated that the Application has the same life as a Singleton component. While they are very close, there are some minute differences. The Application itself is TREATED as a Singleton by the OS and is alive for as long as ANY component is alive, including an AppWidget (which may exist in another app) or ContentResolver.
All of your components ultimately access the same object even if they are in multiple Tasks or Processes. However, this is not guaranteed to remain this way forever (as the Application is not ACTUALLY a Singleton), and is only guaranteed in the Google Android, rather than the manufacturer overridden releases. This means that certain things should be handled with care within the Application Object.
Your Application object will not die unless all of your components are killed as well. However, Android has the option to kill any number of components. What this means is that you are never guaranteed to have an Application object, but if any of your components are alive, there IS an Application to associate it to.
Another nice thing about Application is that it is not extricably bound to the components that are running. Your components are bound to it, though, making it extremely useful.
Things to Avoid in Application Object:
As per ususal, avoid static Contexts. In fact, often, you shouldn't store a Context in here at all, because the Application is a Context itself.
Most methods in here should be static, because you are not guaranteed to get the same Application object, even though its extremely likely.
If you override Application, the type of you data and methods store here will help you further determine whether you need to make a Singleton component or not.
Drawables and its derivatives are the most likely to "leak" if not taken care of, so it is also recommended that you avoid references to Drawables here as well.
Runtime State of any single component. This is because, again, you are not guaranteed to get back the same Application object. Additionally, none of the lifecycle events that occur in an Activity are available here.
Things to store in the Application (over Bundle)
The Application is an awesome place to store data and methods that must be shared between components, especially if you have multiple entry points (multiple components that can be started and run aside from a launch activity). In all of my Applications, for instance, I place my DEBUG tags and Log code.
If you have a ContentProvider or BroadcastReceiver, this makes Application even more ideal because these have small lifecycles that are not "renewable" like the Activity or AppWidgetProvider and can now access those data or methods.
Preferences are used to determine, typically, run options over multiple runs, so this can be a great place to handle your SharedPreferences, for instance, with one access rather than one per component. In fact, anything that "persists" across multiple runs is great to access here.
Finally, one major overlooked advantage is that you can store and organize your Constants here without having to load another class or object, because your Application is always running if one of your components is. This is especially useful for Intent Actions and Exception Messages and other similar types of constants.
Things to store in Bundle rather than Application
Run-time state that is dependent upon the presence or state of a single component or single component run. Additionally, anything that is dependant upon the display state, orientation, or similar Android Services is not preferrable here. This is because Application is never notified of these changes. Finally, anything that depends upon notification from that Android System should not be placed here, such as reaction to Lifecycle events.
And.... Elsewhere
In regard to other data that needs to be persisted, you always have databases, network servers, and the File System. Use them as you always would have.
As useful and overlooked as the Application is, a good understanding is important as it is not ideal. Hopefully, these clarifications will give you a little understanding as to why gurus encourage one way over the other. Understand that many developers have similar needs and most instruction is based on what techniques and knowledge a majority of the community has. Nothing that Google says applies to all programmer's needs and there is a reason that the Application was not declared Final.
Remember, there is a reason Android needs to be able to kill your components. And the primary reason is memory, not processing. By utilizing the Application as described above and developing the appropriate methods to persist the appropriate information, you can build stronger apps that are considerate to the System, the User, its sibling components AND other developers. Utilizing the information that everyone here has provided should give you some great guidance as to how and when to extend your Application.
Hope this helps,
FuzzicalLogic
I prefer to subclass Application and point my manifest to that. I think that's the sane way of coding android although the Android architects from Google think you should use Singletons (eek) to do that. Singletons have the same lifetime as Application so everything that applies to them applies to Application except much less dependency mess Singletons create. Essentially they don't even use bundles. I think using subclass Application has dramatically made programming in Android much faster with far less hassle.
Now for the downside. Your application can be shutdown should the phone need more memory or your Application goes into the background. That could mean the user answered the phone or checked their email. So for example, say you have an Activity that forces the user to login to get a token that other Activities will use to make server calls. That's something you might store in your service object (not android service just a class that sends network calls to your server) that you store in your subclass of Application. Well if your Application gets shutdown you'll loose that token, and when the user clicks the back button your user might return to an Activity that assumes you are already authenticated and boom your service class fails to work.
So what can you do? Continue to use Bundle awfulness? Well no you could easily store security tokens into the bundle (although there might be some security issues with that depending on how this works for your app), or you have to code your Activities to not assume a specific state the Application is in. I had to check for a loss of the token and redirect the user back to the login screen when that happens. But, depending on how much state your Application object holds this could be tricky. But keep in mind your Application can know when it's being shutdown and persist it's internal state to a bundle. That at least allows you to keep your Objects in memory for 99% of the time your Application, and only save/restore when it gets shutdown rather than constantly serializing and deserializing with boiler plate code whenever you move between Activities. Using Application lets you centralize how your program can be brought up and shutdown, and since it normally lives longer than any one activity it can reduce the need for the program to reconstitute the guts of your App as the user moves between Activities. That makes your code cleaner by keeping out details of the app from every Activity, reduces overhead if your Application is already built, shares common instances/code, and allows Activities to be reclaimed without loosing your program all together. All good programs need a centralized hub that is the core, and subclassing Application gives you that while allowing you to participate in the Android lifecycle.
My personal favorite is to use http://flexjson.sourceforge.net/ to serialize my Java objects into bundles as JSON if I need to send objects around or save them. Far easier than writing to sqlite DB when all you need to do is persist data. And nice when sending data between two Activities using objects instead of broken apart primitives.
Remember by centralizing your model in the Application you create a place to share code between multiple Activities so you can always delegate an Activities persistence to an object in the Application by hooking the onPause() as well allowing persistence to be centrally located.
The short answer is: use bundles as it makes saving your state out when you're backgrounded easier. Also, it's complicated.
The long answer:
My understanding is, as soon as you Activity's onPause method is called (and onSaveInstanceState which gives you a bundle into which you should store your Activity's data) your process can be terminated without further warning. Later, when the user comes back to your application, your activity is given an onCreate call with that original bundle from which to restore its state. This will happen to all your activitys in what was your original stack.
Being able to restore your state from the bundle (which Android will save for you as your process goes away) is how Android maintain's the myth of multi-tasking. If you don't dump your activity's state out to a bundle each time onSaveInstanceState is called, your app will look like it's been restarted when the user may have just switched out for a second. This can be especially troubling when the system is resource constrained as the system would need to kill off processes more often in order to keep the device running quickly
Why the Application can be Bad
The Application does not actually get a chance to save any of its data if the process is shut down. It does have an onDestroy method but the docs will tell you that this actually never gets called by the system on an actual device. This means that, in the constrained case I mentioned above, any incidental information about what's going on within an Activity (if you've saved it in the Application) will be lost if the process is ended.
Developer's often miss this case (and it can be really annoying for users) because they're either running on a dev phone which never gets hit with using many applications at the same time. We're also never using the app for a while, then switching to another application and, after a while, switching back again.
I've decided to integrate OpenFeint into my new game to have achievements and leaderboards.
The game is dynamic and I would like user to be rewarded immediately for some successful results, but as it seems for me, OpenFeint's achievements are a bit sluggish and it shows visual notification only when it receives confirmation from the server.
Is it possible to change something in settings or hack it a little bit to show notification immediately as soon as it checks only local database if the achievement has not been unlocked it?
Not sure if this relates to the Android version of the SDK (which seems even slower), but we couldn't figure out how to make it faster. It was so unacceptably slow that we started developing our own framework that fixes most of open feint's shortcomings and then some. Check out Swarm, it might fit your needs better.
There are several things you can do to more tightly control the timing of these notifications. I'll explain one approach and you can use this as a starting point to explore further on your own. These suggestions apply specifically to iOS apps. One caveat is that these suggestions refer to internal APIs in OFSDK 2.8 for iOS and not ordinarily recommended for high level use and subject to change in future versions.
The first thing I recommend is that you build the sample app with your own product key. Use the standard sample app to experiment before applying the result to your own code.
You are going to get the snappiest response by separating the notification pop-up UI from the process of submitting the achievement. This way you don't have to worry about getting wrapped up in the logic for deciding whether the submission is going just to the local db or is doing the full confirmation on an async network transaction.
See the declaration of "showAchievementNotice" in "OFNotification.h". Performing a search in the sample app, you will see that this is the internal API used for displaying the achievement pop-up when an achievement is earned. It does not actually submit the achievement. You can call this method directly as it is called from "OFAchievementService.mm" to directly control when the message appears. You can then use the following article to disable the pop-up from being called when the actual submission occurs:
http://support.openfeint.com/dev/notification-pop-ups-in-ios/
This gives you complete freedom to call the submission at a later time provided you keep track of the need to do so. For example, you could locally serialize a flag to take care of the actual submission either after the level is done or the next time the app starts up. Don't forget that the user could quit out of a game without cleanly finishing a level.
I have a rather popular Bonjour-based application in App Store. It works perfectly, but around 0.2% of my users report a bizarre bug: "no arrows appear on the edges of the screen, so I can't share stuff with other people!". Needless to say, displaying these arrows is tied to the browsing of a particular Bonjour service on the local domain.
The problem is, the Apple review team seems to intermittently happen to be in this 0.2%. This isn't good for review results, as you might imagine. No matter how much I try, I cannot reproduce this bug.
From the few logs I have, it looks like my app is running correctly, just not receiving NSNetServiceBrowser delegate calls. What can cause this?
Things I've tried:
Having a shorter service name < 14 chars in length to be in spec.
Publishing on #"local." rather than #"" (aka Go Look For The Default Registration Domain). My app is rather useless on a wide-area network anyway.
Things I haven't tried: restarting the browsing machinery periodically. (I have two browsers, though, one looking for the legacy longer name, one for the new shorter one.)
What to do?
There are many areas where things can go wrong. Since the NSNetService instance provided to your delegate methods is autoreleased, you need to retain it if you plan on reusing it out of scope for that method. Most people will add it to an NSMutableArray or NSMutableDictionary so that it is automatically retained, and only autoreleased when removed from the collection. If that is the case for your code, make sure that you have properly initialized your collection before adding the object. Since messages to nil are perfectly ok, you may be sending the addObject:netService message to nil. You will not receive an obvious indication that you never initialized your array or dictionary, and it will appear as though everything is working just fine…except that delegate messages “mysteriously” don’t fire off when peers change status, when you try to connect to one, etc. This crops up often enough in Bonjour troubleshooting that I would recommend it as the first place to start your troubleshooting. It happens to the best of us.
One easily missed problem for apps running network code on a background thread: throwing an un-handled exception on that thread. This can occur without crashing your whole app due to Cocoa/Unix’s rules on threading. If your networking code “just stops working for no reason,” then you may want to check your iPhones Console and logs for error messages. Make sure you have set a breakpoint on the objc_exception_throw symbol.
For more, read the full article "Troubleshooting Bonjour Networking for the iPhone" at my dev blog.
I have an application that allows you to edit some percentages, however it will only let you commit those changes if the percentages add up to 100. However because the Core Data template includes the save code in the application will terminate. If the user changed something and then exited the application, the item would be of course saved even though it did not add to a 100%.
Therefore I simply decided to comment out the save in the application will terminate. I know the other option would be to use another context for the edit and then merge the changes or setting my context values until the actual save point. However I do not see any harm in commenting out this line, since I save whatever I want in my application when the user clicks the save button, so my question is: is the save on the application will terminate mandatory? what possible consequences could this have?. It is important to note that the application continues to work just fine after commenting this lines (which is what I expected).
Thank you in advance.
-Oscar
You can save whenever you like.
However, you will never know when the app will terminate. Unlike applications on more conventional platforms e.g desktops, the iPhoneOS will terminate your app (from the apps perspective) at random. The only warning you will get will be the applicationWillTerminate message sent to the app delegate. If you don't handle saves there then it is highly likely that at some point, your users will lose data.
I think you should reconsider your design. It sounds like you're putting calculation into the managedobjects that could (1) be handled elsewhere in code or (2) be handled by transient properties. You shouldn't have a condition in which the managedobject can't be saved at the drop of hat. Doing so makes your datamodel utterly dependent on external code for its internal integrity. This causes problem with maintenance, portability and upgrading.
Its not mandatory to save on application will terminate. You can save when ever you feel appropriate for the context of the app.