继续学习Android,我读了以下内容:

Question: Does the user have a choice to kill the application unless we put a menu option in to kill it? If no such option exists, how does the user terminate the application? Answer: (Romain Guy): The user doesn't, the system handles this automatically. That's what the activity lifecycle (especially onPause/onStop/onDestroy) is for. No matter what you do, do not put a "quit" or "exit" application button. It is useless with Android's application model. This is also contrary to how core applications work.

呵呵,我在Android世界里每走一步都会遇到一些问题=(

显然,你不能在Android中退出应用程序(但Android系统可以随时完全销毁你的应用程序)。这是怎么回事?我开始认为这是不可能写一个应用程序的功能作为“正常的应用程序”-用户可以退出应用程序时,他/她决定这么做。这不应该依靠操作系统来完成。

我正在尝试创建的应用程序不是Android市场的应用程序。它不是一个被大众“广泛使用”的应用程序,它是一个将在非常狭窄的商业领域使用的商业应用程序。

我其实很期待为Android平台开发,因为它解决了Windows Mobile和。net中存在的许多问题。然而,上周对我来说有点令人失望……我希望我不必放弃Android,但它现在看起来不太好=(

有办法让我真的退出应用程序吗?


当前回答

回答:(罗曼盖伊):用户不需要,系统会处理这个问题 自动。这就是活动生命周期(特别是 onPause/onStop/onDestroy)用于。无论你做什么,都不要放不下 “退出”或“退出”应用程序按钮。这在安卓系统中毫无用处 应用程序模型。这也与核心应用程序的方式相反 工作。

1: Totally exiting an application may be generally unmandatory, but it is not useless. What if windows had no exit option? System would be doggy slow as memory was full and the OS had to guess at which programs you were done with. I don't care what Romain Guy or even Larry Page and Sergey Brin say - these are unquestionable facts: Systems run slower when they have to kill tasks to get their memory before a new app can be launched. You just can't tell me that it doesn't take time to kill an app! Even the light from distant stars take time... There is some use in allowing the user to fully close apps.

2:与核心应用程序的工作方式相反?这是什么意思?当我现在运行一个应用程序时,它不再做任何工作……它只是在需要内存时等待被操作系统杀死。

总而言之,最小化和退出之间有明显的区别,两者都不适合对方。每个螺丝上都留个螺丝刀吗?还是每扇门都有钥匙?我们是不是把所有的电器都开着,直到断路器爆炸,我们需要打开另一个电器?我们是不是把洗碗机里装满了盘子,每次只拿出足够的空间来放一些新的脏盘子?我们把所有的车都停在车道上,直到——哦,算了。

如果用户想要最小化应用程序,那么最好的方法就是最小化它。如果用户想要退出应用程序,那么无论如何最好是退出。

这会让人皱眉吗?这是Android的观点——他们不赞成。许多独立的Android新手开发者对此表示不满。

但当它落到实处时,有好的编码和坏的编码。有好的程序流模型也有坏的程序流模型。

当用户知道他们已经用完了程序时,把程序留在内存中并不是好的程序流程。它完全没有任何用处,而且在启动新应用程序或运行应用程序分配更多内存时,它会减慢运行速度。

这有点像你的汽车:有时你让它一直开着,比如在红绿灯前停车,或者在快餐店经过时停车,或者在自动取款机前停车。但在其他情况下,你确实想把它关掉——比如当你去工作的时候,或者在杂货店,甚至在家里。

同样地,如果你正在玩游戏,这时手机响了。暂停游戏并继续运行。但如果用户已经玩了一段时间,那就让他们退出游戏吧。

The exit button on some applications should be more out in front than others. Games, for example, or programs where the user is likely to want to fully exit, should have an obvious exit. Other programs, like, perhaps, email programs, where exiting is an unlikely desire (so that it can keep checking for email) -- these programs should not waste prime control input screen space with an exit option, but for good program flow, it should have an exit option. What if someone decides they don't want their mail program trying to check email when they are in poor coverage area, or maybe in a Skype call or whatever? Let them exit the email program if they want!

暂停和退出是两项至关重要的任务,两者都不能实现对方的作用。

其他回答

我花了更长的时间来阅读这个问答,而不是真正实现一个半正确的Android应用程序生命周期。

这是一个GPS应用程序,轮询积分,并每隔几秒钟通过线程将当前位置发送到web服务…在Ted的情况下,这可能是每5分钟轮询一次更新,然后onStop可以简单地启动Ted所关心的更新活动,如果发现了一个(异步Ted,不要像Windows程序员那样编码,否则您的程序将像Windows程序一样运行……呃,这也没那么难)。

我在onCreate中做了一些初始代码来设置活动生命周期,包括checkUpdate.start();:

...

@Override
public void onStart() {
    super.onStart();
    isRemote = true;
    checkUpdate.resume();

    locationManager.requestLocationUpdates(LocationManager.GPS_PROVIDER, 2000, 0, luh);
}

@Override
public void onPause() {
    isRemote = false;
    checkUpdate.suspend();
    locationManager.removeUpdates(luh);
    super.onStop();
}

这段代码可能是完全错误的,但它是有效的。这是我的第一个Android应用程序。

Voilà, an application that doesn't consume CPU when it's in the background, yet is instantly ready to reopen because it is in RAM (although not holding RAM as is the Android lifecycle) ... an app is always ready, it's a phone, guys/gals. If an app was to use up all the RAM and couldn't be shut down by the OS then the thing might stop ringing =P That's why the OS needs to be able to close your app when it's in the background (if your application isn't a resource hog it won't be closed BTW), so let's just write better applications.

在任何情况下,如果你想终止你的应用程序,你可以调用System.exit(0);。

你可以使用Process.killProcess(Process.myPid());杀死你的应用程序,但它可能不安全?我使用这个方法后没有遇到任何问题或崩溃,使用这个方法后,我的应用程序在DDMS列表中的进程消失了。

回答:(罗曼盖伊):用户不需要,系统会处理这个问题 自动。这就是活动生命周期(特别是 onPause/onStop/onDestroy)用于。无论你做什么,都不要放不下 “退出”或“退出”应用程序按钮。这在安卓系统中毫无用处 应用程序模型。这也与核心应用程序的方式相反 工作。

1: Totally exiting an application may be generally unmandatory, but it is not useless. What if windows had no exit option? System would be doggy slow as memory was full and the OS had to guess at which programs you were done with. I don't care what Romain Guy or even Larry Page and Sergey Brin say - these are unquestionable facts: Systems run slower when they have to kill tasks to get their memory before a new app can be launched. You just can't tell me that it doesn't take time to kill an app! Even the light from distant stars take time... There is some use in allowing the user to fully close apps.

2:与核心应用程序的工作方式相反?这是什么意思?当我现在运行一个应用程序时,它不再做任何工作……它只是在需要内存时等待被操作系统杀死。

总而言之,最小化和退出之间有明显的区别,两者都不适合对方。每个螺丝上都留个螺丝刀吗?还是每扇门都有钥匙?我们是不是把所有的电器都开着,直到断路器爆炸,我们需要打开另一个电器?我们是不是把洗碗机里装满了盘子,每次只拿出足够的空间来放一些新的脏盘子?我们把所有的车都停在车道上,直到——哦,算了。

如果用户想要最小化应用程序,那么最好的方法就是最小化它。如果用户想要退出应用程序,那么无论如何最好是退出。

这会让人皱眉吗?这是Android的观点——他们不赞成。许多独立的Android新手开发者对此表示不满。

但当它落到实处时,有好的编码和坏的编码。有好的程序流模型也有坏的程序流模型。

当用户知道他们已经用完了程序时,把程序留在内存中并不是好的程序流程。它完全没有任何用处,而且在启动新应用程序或运行应用程序分配更多内存时,它会减慢运行速度。

这有点像你的汽车:有时你让它一直开着,比如在红绿灯前停车,或者在快餐店经过时停车,或者在自动取款机前停车。但在其他情况下,你确实想把它关掉——比如当你去工作的时候,或者在杂货店,甚至在家里。

同样地,如果你正在玩游戏,这时手机响了。暂停游戏并继续运行。但如果用户已经玩了一段时间,那就让他们退出游戏吧。

The exit button on some applications should be more out in front than others. Games, for example, or programs where the user is likely to want to fully exit, should have an obvious exit. Other programs, like, perhaps, email programs, where exiting is an unlikely desire (so that it can keep checking for email) -- these programs should not waste prime control input screen space with an exit option, but for good program flow, it should have an exit option. What if someone decides they don't want their mail program trying to check email when they are in poor coverage area, or maybe in a Skype call or whatever? Let them exit the email program if they want!

暂停和退出是两项至关重要的任务,两者都不能实现对方的作用。

有一个(相对)简单的设计可以让你绕过“退出”难题。让你的应用程序有一个“基本”状态(活动),这只是一个空白的屏幕。在活动的第一个onCreate,你可以启动另一个活动,你的应用程序的主要功能在其中。“退出”可以通过finish()完成第二个活动并返回到空白屏幕的底部来完成。操作系统可以在内存中保留这个空白屏幕,只要它想要…

本质上,因为你无法退出到操作系统,你只是转化成一个自我创造的虚无。