🙅♂️Don't let ViewModel know about framework level dependencies
Let's discuss some good practices to make ViewModel better!
5 min read
Hey Android developers 👋, Most of today's developers are adopting MVVM architecture primarily for Android app development👨💻. While adopting these things, anyone can do certain mistakes (which is absolutely fine). In this article, we are gonna see how to follow good practices with ViewModels in Android and how some decisions can make us helpless. Okay, let's start 🏃♂️.
Let's understand the concept of ViewModel and what's its purpose.
🤷♂️ What's ViewModel?
In MVVM architecture, it suggests separating the data presentation logic(Views or UI) from the core business logic part of the application. ViewModel is such a component whose work is to execute core business and prepare required data for UI. So that ViewModel can be used by Activities/Fragments.
- In Android, ViewModel is a part of Android's Architecture component.
- UI shouldn't hold the logic, have to move it to ViewModel.
- UI will subscribe to any state changes in ViewModel and will update UI accordingly (reactive approach).
- ViewModel is lifecycle aware and can survive changes.
- 🔴 ViewModel should not hold Android framework references (Not Mandatory). For e.g. Activity, Context, View, Drawable, etc.
🤔 Why ViewModel shouldn't hold framework references?
As we discussed earlier that ViewModel is lifecycle aware but
View is not. Many developers also pass the
View references to the ViewModel which is the most common case that developers make the ViewModel framework aware. But ViewModel should not be treated like this. If the
View reference remains in ViewModel and it gets destroyed then
ViewModel still hold that reference which may lead to the memory leaks 😮. Thus, the purpose for which ViewModel came into the picture is broken💔.
As you can see in the title, I've mentioned "Don't let ViewModel knew about FRAMEWORK LEVEL DEPENDENCIES". So let's discuss what's exactly Framework Level Dependencies.
So as you might be aware of AndroidViewModel and have used already for some rare cases.
ViewModelthat has Application Context awareness.
Now when we are introducing
Context in ViewModel, the last point 🔴 mentioned above is breaking. Why? Because
Context is a part of Android's framework. Then it decreases testability, modularity and maintainability of the codebase. No matter our application is small scale or large scale but having tests is always good because it acts as a safeguard as it gets expanding. That thing is breaking by using
AndroidViewModel. Because it doesn't let us write unit tests for that part of code (integration testing is possible only) ☹. After all, everyone knows how tricky it is to control memory leaks from the usage of
Context if something goes wrong.
Why do we need
For handling framework supported tasks in ViewModel sometimes we may need it. Example: File management, storage, WorkManager APIs, etc. But it's completely up to us to implement business without using it.
Let's see the example implementation to understand the problems...
👨💻 Example Implementation
Okay, so we have to develop a simple android app that stores a user session and performs simple login/logout actions. Now it's obvious that we'll need to use
SharedPreferences. So let's see how we can implement it.
❌ Example using
I'm skipping UI code and will be only showing the
ViewModel code. So let's create
UserViewModel. Need to inherit
AndroidViewModel and create
SharedPreferences for storing a user session. Also, let's implement business for setting a user session.
Have you seen this code😕? Let's discuss key issues with this.
👎 Disadvantages of this approach
ViewModelis not unit-testable.
- If we need to use sessions in let's say another
ViewModelwe'll again need to copy the same code there. It'll lead to code duplication👯♂️.
- Hard to maintain if something changes.
- Lost single-responsibility principle since ViewModel does everything.
Isn't it painful? 🤕
Let's see how can we make it better 🦸♂️
✔ Example using
So after coming from the previous approach, we need a solution that will be modular, easy to maintain, easy to plug whenever need. So we can extract the logic of session management into a separate class 😃.
Let's create a
SessionManager. Create and implement operations/business logic of session management.
Now, it's time to refactor and clean up
😃 Can you see the difference? Now it has inherited core
ViewModel. Too much code is now removed.
👍 Advantages of this approach
SessionManagerand its implementation will be responsible for managing user session related business. Thus, we achieved the Single-responsibility principle from SOLID.
- ViewModel now only care about executing required business and updating UI state accordingly.
SessionManageris handling session management.
UserViewModelis referencing interface
SessionManagernot a class so it (ViewModel) doesn't care or know what's happening under the hood. It means, now ViewModel doesn't have knowledge of Framework dependencies 😀.
- If any other
ViewModelor part of code needs to handle the session management then they just get an instance of
SessionManagerand that's all!
- Easy to maintain.
👎 Disadvantages of this approach
🙄 Obviously NOT 😅
After using the best approach,
UserViewModel is ready for testing. Let's write code to test the code😂.
Cool! That's all. I hope this article helped to understand the pitfalls of
If you need to have a look at both approaches, refer to this GitHub Repository. Here you'll find both approaches. Also, if you want to take a look at just diff only➕➖ then refer to this Pull Request which is a change from the first approach to the second.
Thank you! 😀
"Sharing is caring"
Did you find this article valuable?
Support Shreyas Patil by becoming a sponsor. Any amount is appreciated!