On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Syed Rakib Al Hasan <[email protected]> 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 [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
