You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our current approach to map task layouts can lead to some view identifier conflict issues, e.g. #2493. In particular we're running into a conflict between identifiers because of the following behavior:
An ID doesn't need to be unique throughout the entire tree, but it must be unique within the part of the tree you search. It might often be the entire tree, so it's best to make it unique when possible.
We currently render all of our map task views dynamically. Each one is a subclass of and abstract map task class. The dynamic view rendering seems to create conflicts between dynamically generated identifiers and existing map view identifiers.
We might be able to simplify things by reducing our use of subclassing and abstraction here. I can imagine a simpler world in which our map tasks have dedicated layouts just as the other tasks possess, this might help with identifier conflicts. We may also need to be smart about reusing/cleaning up existing map views.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Our current approach to map task layouts can lead to some view identifier conflict issues, e.g. #2493. In particular we're running into a conflict between identifiers because of the following behavior:
(see https://developer.android.com/develop/ui/views/layout/declaring-layout).
We currently render all of our map task views dynamically. Each one is a subclass of and abstract map task class. The dynamic view rendering seems to create conflicts between dynamically generated identifiers and existing map view identifiers.
We might be able to simplify things by reducing our use of subclassing and abstraction here. I can imagine a simpler world in which our map tasks have dedicated layouts just as the other tasks possess, this might help with identifier conflicts. We may also need to be smart about reusing/cleaning up existing map views.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: