On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Neilz <neilhorn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Now maybe this is obvious, but I must say I haven't seen this in any > other examples. I'm wondering if there's something 'wrong' with this, > any reason why this shouldn't be done?
1. Watch for memory leaks. Do not put things in static contexts that might reference another Activity, for example (e.g., a widget). 2. Since Java does not support multiple inheritance, the base class may interfere with uses of other activity classes (e.g., PreferenceActivity, MapActivity), or require code duplication. Rather than having a "load of static objects", you could have just one singleton that itself holds onto a "load" of other data. That will make it easier for you to migrate to another approach (e.g., Service, custom Application) if you so choose to later. It also consolidates your initialization, makes it a bit easier to give the static data more smarts about its static-ness (e.g., LRU algorithms to minimize memory creep), etc. -- Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) http://commonsware.com | http://github.com/commonsguy http://commonsware.com/blog | http://twitter.com/commonsguy Android App Developer Books: http://commonsware.com/books -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
