Pros of architecture-components-samples

• Demonstrates best practices for Android architecture components
• Regularly updated with new samples and features
• Comprehensive coverage of various Android development scenarios

Cons of architecture-components-samples

• May be overwhelming for beginners due to the large number of samples
• Some samples might not be applicable to specific project requirements
• Requires a good understanding of Android architecture principles

Code Comparison

architecture-components-samples:

class UserViewModel(private val repository: UserRepository) : ViewModel() {
    private val _user = MutableLiveData<User>()
    val user: LiveData<User> = _user

    fun loadUser(userId: String) {
        viewModelScope.launch {
            _user.value = repository.getUser(userId)
        }
    }
}

As the comparison is between the same repository, there is no different code to compare.

Summary

The architecture-components-samples repository is an excellent resource for Android developers looking to implement best practices and explore various architecture components. It offers a wide range of samples covering different scenarios, which can be both beneficial and potentially overwhelming. The repository's regular updates ensure that developers have access to the latest Android development techniques and patterns. However, it may require a solid foundation in Android development to fully utilize and understand the provided examples.

Pros of Sunflower

• More focused and cohesive example of a single app
• Demonstrates modern Android development practices in a real-world scenario
• Regularly updated with the latest Android architecture components and libraries

Cons of Sunflower

• Less comprehensive in covering all architecture components
• May be overwhelming for beginners due to its complexity
• Limited to a single use case, which may not cover all developer needs

Code Comparison

Sunflower (PlantDetailFragment.kt):

private fun subscribeUi(adapter: PlantAdapter, binding: FragmentPlantDetailBinding) {
    viewModel.plant.observe(viewLifecycleOwner) { plant ->
        binding.plant = plant
        plant?.let {
            adapter.submitList(it.plantings)
        }
    }
}

Architecture Components Samples (BasicSample/UserActivity.kt):

private fun updateUserName() {
    viewModel.userName.observe(this, Observer { userName ->
        binding.userName.text = userName
    })
}

Both examples demonstrate the use of ViewModel and LiveData, but Sunflower's implementation is more complex and showcases additional components like data binding and list adapters.

Pros of compose-samples

• Focuses on modern UI development with Jetpack Compose
• Provides more up-to-date examples of Android app architecture
• Demonstrates integration of Compose with other Jetpack libraries

Cons of compose-samples

• Limited coverage of traditional View-based UI development
• May be less suitable for developers maintaining legacy Android apps
• Smaller number of samples compared to architecture-components-samples

Code Comparison

architecture-components-samples (XML-based UI):

<TextView
    android:id="@+id/title"
    android:layout_width="wrap_content"
    android:layout_height="wrap_content"
    android:text="@string/hello_world" />

compose-samples (Jetpack Compose UI):

@Composable
fun Greeting(name: String) {
    Text(text = "Hello $name!")
}

Summary

compose-samples is ideal for developers looking to adopt Jetpack Compose and modern Android development practices. It offers fewer but more focused examples. architecture-components-samples provides a broader range of samples covering various architecture components, making it valuable for developers working with both new and legacy Android projects. The code comparison highlights the shift from XML-based layouts to declarative UI in Kotlin.

Pros of uamp

• Focuses on a complete, real-world music player application
• Demonstrates media playback and audio-specific Android features
• Includes examples of UI testing and integration with Android Auto

Cons of uamp

• Less diverse in terms of architecture component examples
• May be overwhelming for beginners due to its complexity
• Fewer individual, focused samples for specific components

Code Comparison

uamp (MediaItemAdapter.kt):

override fun onBindViewHolder(holder: MediaViewHolder, position: Int) {
    val item = getItem(position)
    holder.item = item
    holder.titleView.text = item.description.title
    holder.subtitleView.text = item.description.subtitle
    holder.imageView.setImageBitmap(item.description.iconBitmap)
}

architecture-components-samples (UserAdapter.kt):

override fun onBindViewHolder(holder: UserViewHolder, position: Int) {
    val user = getItem(position)
    holder.bind(user)
}

The uamp example shows more detailed view binding, while the architecture-components-samples code is more concise and relies on a separate bind function.

Pros of Now in Android

• Showcases a complete, production-ready app with modern Android development practices
• Implements Jetpack Compose for UI, demonstrating its usage in a real-world scenario
• Utilizes more recent libraries and patterns, such as Hilt for dependency injection

Cons of Now in Android

• More complex and potentially overwhelming for beginners
• Focuses on a single, opinionated architecture, which may not suit all project needs
• Requires more setup and understanding of advanced concepts to get started

Code Comparison

Architecture-components-samples:

@Dao
interface UserDao {
    @Query("SELECT * FROM user")
    fun getAll(): List<User>

    @Insert
    fun insertAll(vararg users: User)
}

Now in Android:

@Dao
interface TopicDao {
    @Query("""
        SELECT * FROM topics
        WHERE id IN (:topicIds)
    """)
    fun getTopicEntities(topicIds: Set<String>): Flow<List<TopicEntity>>

    @Upsert
    suspend fun upsertTopics(topics: List<TopicEntity>)
}

The Now in Android example demonstrates more advanced usage of Room, including Flow and suspend functions for coroutines support.