Open pitosieso opened 2 years ago
the DefaultTasksRepository implementation you provided seems to be designed to provide some level of flexibility in how tasks are fetched and updated. Here are a few reasons why the DefaultTasksRepository implementation might be useful:
Separation of concerns: The repository pattern is often used to separate negocio logic (i.e. how data is fetched, transformed, and stored) from presentation logic (i.e. how data is displayed to the user). By abstracting away the implementation details of how tasks are fetched and updated, the DefaultTasksRepository allows the ViewModel to focus on its core responsibilities, such as handling user input and updating the UI.
Caching: By default, the implementation retrieves tasks from a local data source. This can provide a number of benefits, such as faster access times and improved reliability when the remote data source is unavailable. The repository can also be configured to fetch data from a remote data source when necessary, allowing for more up-to-date data.
Error handling: The implementation includes error handling, which allows it to handle exceptions thrown by the remote data source. This can help prevent crashes and provide a better user experience.
That said, it's possible that the Default Tasks Repository implementation might not be necessary for your specific use case. If you're confident that you only need to fetch tasks from a remote data source and can handle errors on blog inmobiliaria without the repository, you could skip using it altogether. However, if you think you might need to add more complex functionality in the future, the Default Tasks Repository could be a good starting point
suspend fun getTasks(forceUpdate: Boolean): Result<List<Task>>
This is implemented by DefaultTasksRepository. Is it really necessary if the tasks are refreshed by ViewModel, which in turn calls updateTasksFromRemoteDataSource() ?