MobDev wrote: > hhmm ok... > So I guess it should be possible for example to make my own class > extending AsyncTask and implementing callaback interfaces to it from > the aforementioned modules, does that sound feasable/logical at all ?
You shouldn't need that. The point of AsyncTask is to do things in a background thread. Hence, use synchronous operations, not asynchronous ones, from calls originating *inside* AsyncTask's doInBackground(). > The > conneciton module has to be started, then the AsynTask will have to > wait for a response from that module telling it it's done downloading, > then the AsyncTask should start the parsing, wait till that's done and > then finally it can write to the DB... Why, then, are you using an AsyncTask? Either write everything as synchronous and then use AsyncTask to move it to the background, or write everything as asynchronous and get rid of the AsyncTask. Using an AsyncTask won't make background work be even *more* background, after all. -- Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) http://commonsware.com | http://twitter.com/commonsguy Android Training in NYC: 4-6 June 2010: http://guruloft.com -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
