Fix : #5405 Feature/replace deprecated bundle calls

[TanishMoral11]

Explanation

Fix #5405 : This PR addresses the deprecation of certain Bundle methods in Android API level 33, as detailed in Feature Request #5405. Specifically, it replaces the usage of deprecated, type-ambiguous Bundle calls with type-safe alternatives from the BundleCompat class, which ensures compatibility with the updated Android API.

Changes Made:

• Refactor of Bundle method calls:

  • Bundle.get() and Bundle.getSerializable() calls have been replaced with BundleCompat.get() and BundleCompat.getSerializable() respectively, using type-safe methods that are now required by API 33 and above.

• Refactor of helper methods:

  • The getTypedSerializable() method in BundleExtensions.kt has been removed since it essentially reimplemented the BundleCompat.getSerializable() method. This reduces redundancy and ensures that the code uses the built-in methods of BundleCompat for serializable objects.

Additional Changes:

• Replaced deprecated getSerializable() calls with BundleCompat.getSerializable().
• Replaced get() calls with type-specific methods (e.g., getString(), getInt()).
• Updated getTypedSerializable() helper method to use BundleCompat.
• Modified affected files:
  • OptionsActivity.kt
  • TestFontScaleConfigurationUtilActivity.kt
  • TopicPracticeFragment.kt
  • BundleExtensions.kt
  • BundleExtensionsTest.kt

These changes were made to ensure compatibility with Android API level 33 (and later), which deprecated certain Bundle methods in favor of BundleCompat methods, specifically for better handling of type-specific data.

Testing:

• Ensured that all affected fragments and activities were tested for correct behavior when navigating between them.
• Validated that configuration changes (e.g., device rotation) do not break the functionality of the app.
• Updated unit tests in BundleExtensionsTest.kt to ensure correct usage of the new type-safe methods.

This PR addresses part of issue #5405 by ensuring that all deprecated Bundle method calls are replaced and the app continues to function smoothly on API 33 and later.

Essential Checklist

• The PR title and explanation each start with "Fix #bugnum: " (If this PR fixes part of an issue, prefix the title with "Fix part of #bugnum: ...".)
• Any changes to scripts/assets files have their rationale included in the PR explanation.
• The PR follows the style guide.
• The PR does not contain any unnecessary code changes from Android Studio (reference).
• The PR is made from a branch that's not called "develop" and is up-to-date with "develop".
• The PR is assigned to the appropriate reviewers (reference).

[TanishMoral11]

Hey @adhiamboperes ,

I'm reaching out because I encountered a couple of issues after updating the AndroidX dependencies, and I would appreciate your assistance in resolving them.

1. Duplicate Content Roots Error

After updating the dependencies, I received the following error when attempting to run the app:

Duplicate content roots detected Path: [C:/Users/Tanish/AndroidStudioProjects/0 PEN SOURCE/oppia-android/app/src/sharedTest/java] of module [oppia-android.app.unitTest] was removed from modules [oppia-android.app.androidTest]

It appears to be related to duplicate module paths, but I'm unsure about the appropriate steps to resolve this. Could you please provide some guidance on how to address this issue?

2. Gradle Duplicate Entry Error

In addition, during the Running process, I encountered the following error:

Caused by: org.gradle.api.InvalidUserCodeException: Entry arguments.proto is a duplicate but no duplicate handling strategy has been set. Please refer to https://docs.gradle.org/7.6/dsl/org.gradle.api.tasks.Copy.html#org.gradle.api.tasks.Copy:duplicatesStrategy for details.

From my understanding, this is related to duplicate file handling in the Gradle build process. However, I’m uncertain about how to configure it correctly to resolve the issue. Any advice or recommendations would be extremely helpful.

Thanks !!

[oppiabot]

Hi @TanishMoral11, I'm going to mark this PR as stale because it hasn't had any updates for 7 days. If no further activity occurs within 7 days, it will be automatically closed so that others can take up the issue.
If you are still working on this PR, please make a follow-up commit within 3 days (and submit it for review, if applicable). Please also let us know if you are stuck so we can help you!

[oppiabot]

Hi @TanishMoral11, I'm going to mark this PR as stale because it hasn't had any updates for 7 days. If no further activity occurs within 7 days, it will be automatically closed so that others can take up the issue.
If you are still working on this PR, please make a follow-up commit within 3 days (and submit it for review, if applicable). Please also let us know if you are stuck so we can help you!

[oppiabot]

Hi @TanishMoral11, I'm going to mark this PR as stale because it hasn't had any updates for 7 days. If no further activity occurs within 7 days, it will be automatically closed so that others can take up the issue.
If you are still working on this PR, please make a follow-up commit within 3 days (and submit it for review, if applicable). Please also let us know if you are stuck so we can help you!

[oppiabot]

Hi @TanishMoral11, I'm going to mark this PR as stale because it hasn't had any updates for 7 days. If no further activity occurs within 7 days, it will be automatically closed so that others can take up the issue.
If you are still working on this PR, please make a follow-up commit within 3 days (and submit it for review, if applicable). Please also let us know if you are stuck so we can help you!