Re: [android-developers] clarify please: couldn't we do the work of fragments using activity groups????

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Syed Rakib Al Hasan
<syed.rakib.al.hasan@gmail.com> wrote:
> fragments have been introduced in API 11
> whereas activityGroup has been there since API 1.
> now, the purpose of using fragments, couldn't we have used the activityGroup
> class to achieve the objectives???

Not completely.

First, activity groups, IMHO, have always been an abomination, and I
am glad to see that they are being phased out.

Second, there is more to the fragment system than just a collection of
widgets. Fragment transactions with animations, back-button
management, tighter lifecycle method relationship with the parent, the
<fragment> element in layouts, are all things beyond what activity
groups alone provide.

Could one create their own fragment-esque framework on top of activity
groups? Perhaps. However, Google apparently agrees with my
"abomination" description, and so they elected to take this
opportunity to refine their approach.

--
Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy)
http://commonsware.com | http://github.com/commonsguy
http://commonsware.com/blog | http://twitter.com/commonsguy

Android Training in Oslo: http://bit.ly/fjBo24

--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en