Actually it looks like PendingIntent pendingIntent = PendingIntent.getBroadcast(context, 0, intent, 0x10000000);
...works for me (0x10000000 represents FLAG_CANCEL_CURRENT). I can verify that the appropriate extras data makes it to the intent. Hope this helps. -Rob On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Rob Franz <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm running into the same thing - sending multiple PIs with the extras > data changing each time. If I send two PIs, I get the first PI extra > data. I'm glad someone else ran into this, because I was going crazy > trying to find out why my stuff wasn't working. > > Seeing a couple of different opinions here... what's the Google- > preferred way to do it? I'm in the US on TMobile so I believe it's > RC33 that I've got. > > Thanks > Rob > > > On Mar 26, 7:08 pm, "info+farm" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you for your detailed answer Blake B., > > > > First of all I understood that different Extras are not act as a > > difference on PendingIntent comparison. > > > > In the first option assigning a stub data element seems reasonable but > > I did not like the approach to put not only irrelevant but also not > > necessary data on each intent call to distinguish them. > > > > With the second approach, assigning FLAG_CANCEL_CURRENT flag to the > > PendingIntent worked well on button calls but did not work on > > notification calls. I received "Sending contentIntent failed: > > android.app.PendingIntent$CanceledException" error in logcat on each > > different PendingIntent start. I have seen a bug report is made about > > this issue(#13) on android-astrid. > > In the issue, it is said that although the javadoc says requestCode is > > not used, the real OS code consider the value specified there. Then, I > > used the requestCodes to distinguish the PendingIntent starts. > > > > Is it possible to get information from the API builders, what will be > > the purpose of the requestCode parameter on PendingIntent creation in > > the future? The reason is I want to be able to sure that my code won't > > stuck at that time of API change. > > > > Regards, > > info+farm > > > > On Mar 25, 5:01 pm, "Blake B." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > To correct my previous statement, PendingIntents are cached by the > > > system, not Intents. The note about how to differentiate Intents > > > still holds though, so if you need to replace a current PendingIntent > > > with a new PI that has a new Intent that only differs by its Extras, > > > be sure to use the flag FLAG_CANCEL_CURRENT so that the cached PI is > > > not used. > > > > > From Intent.filterEquals(o): > > > Returns true if action, data, type, class, and categories are the > > > same. <== note does not include Extras > > > > > From PendingIntents javadoc: > > > > > * <p>A PendingIntent itself is simply a reference to a token > > > maintained by > > > * the system describing the original data used to retrieve it. This > > > means > > > * that, even if its owning application's process is killed, the > > > * PendingIntent itself will remain usable from other processes that > > > * have been given it. If the creating application later re-retrieves > > > the > > > * same kind of PendingIntent (same operation, same Intent action, > > > data, > > > * categories, and components, and same flags), it will receive a > > > PendingIntent > > > * representing the same token if that is still valid, and can thus > > > call > > > * {...@link #cancel} to remove it. > > > > > On Mar 25, 7:48 am, "Blake B." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Intents are cached by the system, and two Intents are not > > > > differentiated by their Extras. So your two intents look like the > > > > same Intent and the second one is being tossed out. You must differ > > > > Intents by their Action/Data/Category. I will sometimes use the Data > > > > field to hold a simple ID that is not really a URI to make two > intents > > > > appear different. Look at the code for Intent.equals() I believe, > and > > > > you will see that Extras are not considered. > > > > > > On Mar 24, 12:47 pm, "info+farm" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Are not Google developers looking into this forum anymore? > > > > > > > Then, I will be missing the detailed answers. > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > info+farm > > > > > > > On Mar 24, 3:17 pm, "info+farm" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello Mr. Murphy, > > > > > > > > I searched for it before sending my post and looked at > > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/threa... > > > > > > andhttp:// > groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/threa... > > > > > > > > But both of them could not find the answer to the problem. > > > > > > > > I am afraidPendingIntenthas different Intent initialization(start > > > > > > ()), from the normal startActivity(). > > > > > > > > I am a little bit confused, > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > info+farm > > > > > > > > On Mar 23, 11:32 pm, Mark Murphy <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > info+farm wrote: > > > > > > > > Am I the only one who is having this problem? > > > > > > > > Actually, I am going to find a workaround for this problem, > but I > > > > > > > > would like to know what I am doing wrong. > > > > > > > > > I do not remember the answer, but I do know this was discussed > on this > > > > > > > list within the past few months. Search the list > forPendingIntentand > > > > > > > you will probably find it. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy)http://commonsware.com > > > > > > > Warescription: Three Android Books, Plus Updates, $35/Year > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
