Null Assertions in null-safe mode and How to Avoid If Possible - dart

Learning Dart and using dart_code_metrics to ensure that I write code that meets expectations. One of the rules that is active is avoid-non-null-assertion.
Note, the code below was created to recreate the problem encountered in a larger code base where the value of unitString is taken from a JSON file. As such the program cannot control what is specified in the JSON file.
From pubspec.yaml
environment:
sdk: '>=2.15.0 <3.0.0'
// ignore_for_file: avoid_print
import 'package:qty/qty.dart';
void main() {
const String unitString = 'in';
// unit.Width returns null if unitString is not a unit of Length.
if (Length().unitWith(symbol: unitString) == null) {
print('units $unitString not supported.');
} else {
// The following line triggers avoid-non-null-assertion with the use of !.
final Unit<Length> units = Length().unitWith(symbol: unitString)!;
final qty = Quantity(amount: 0.0, unit: units);
print('Qty = $qty');
}
}
If I don't use ! then I get the following type error:
A value of type 'Unit<Length>?' can't be assigned to a variable of type 'Unit<Length>'.
Try changing the type of the variable, or casting the right-hand type to 'Unit<Length>'.
Casting the right-hand side to
Unit<Length>
fixes the above error but cause a new error when instantiating Quantity() since the constructor expects
Unit<Length>
and not
Unit<Length>?
I assume there is an solution but I'm new to Dart and cannot formulate the correct search query to find the answer.
How can I modify the sample code to make Dart and dart_code_metrics happy?

Your idea of checking for null before using a value is good, it's just not implemented correctly. Dart does automatically promote nullable types to non-null ones when you check for null with an if, but in this case you need to use a temporary variable.
void main() {
const String unitString = 'in';
//Use a temp variable, you could specify the type instead of using just using final
final temp = Length().unitWith(symbol: unitString);
if (temp == null) {
print('units $unitString not supported.');
} else {
final Unit<Length> units = temp;
final qty = Quantity(amount: 0.0, unit: units);
print('Qty = $qty');
}
}
The basic reason for that when you call your unitWith function and see that it's not null the first time, there's no guarantee that the when you call it again that it will still return a non-null value. I think there's another SO question that details this better, but I can't seem to find.

Related

Dart "upcasting" is not actually upcasting

I am trying to up-cast the subclass object but it is not working.
The following program compiles without any errors.
VideoStreamModel model = VideoStreamModel("");
VideoStream entity = model;
print(model); // prints VideoStreamModel
print(entity); // prints VideoStreamModel
print(entity as VideoStream); // prints VideoStreamModel
print(cast<VideoStream>(model)); // prints VideoStreamModel
I have written a testcase to test the relation of above two classes and it passes.
test('should be a subtype of VideoStream', () async {
expect(model, isA<VideoStream>());
});
What could be the problem here?
EDIT:
[deleted]
EDIT 2:
[deleted]
Edit 3:
Here is the complete code reproducing the error.
import 'package:equatable/equatable.dart';
import 'package:test/test.dart';
class A extends Equatable {
final String x;
A(this.x);
#override
List<Object> get props => [x];
}
class B extends A {
B(String x) : super(x);
A method() {
B b = B(x); // doing A b = A(x) makes the test pass
return b;
}
}
void main() {
B b = B("");
test('test', () async {
final expected = A(b.x);
final actual = b.method();
expect(actual, expected);
});
}
It generates the following assertion error:
Expected: A:<A>
Actual: B:<B>
print is calling the toString() on the object you are pointing at (in this case VideoStreamModel) which knows what type it is. When you are casting, you are not changing anything about the object itself but only how the compiler should see the object when it determines if you are allowed to use a given typed variable to point to the object.
So when you are doing entity as VideoStream you are really just telling the compiler that you "promise" that the entity can be seen as a VideoStream. But on runtime, this cast will be tested to see if it is true.
All of this is really not an issue since you should never test for the specific type of the object when you are programming Dart but instead use the is operator which tests if a given object is compatible with a given interface.
So e,g, (entity is VideoStream) will return true.
Updated part
You problem seems to be a misunderstanding of the use of Equatable. It is important to notice that Equatable are not only using the elements from props to determine if two objects are equal but it also looks at the runtimeType. You can see this from the implementation:
#override
bool operator ==(Object other) =>
identical(this, other) ||
other is Equatable &&
runtimeType == other.runtimeType &&
equals(props, other.props);
https://github.com/felangel/equatable/blob/master/lib/src/equatable.dart#L46
This means that:
A a = A("");
B b = B("");
print(a == b); // false
When you are using expect without any matcher, it will just make an == operation which is stated in the documentation:
matcher can be a value in which case it will be wrapped in an equals matcher
Since we (as stated before) cannot change the runtimeType of an object after its creation you need to implement your own == if you want the two object instances to be seen as equal since equatable does only see two objects as equal if they both is created from the same class and contains the same values defined with props.

Multiple types for a single variable (parameter/return type)

I am very new to Dart so excuse me if I didnt see this part.
I want to make a union type e.g. for a function input. In TS this would be:
let variableInput: string | number
typedef doesnt really define types but functions and enums dont really help too.
On the other side how should it look like when a function return either one or the other of two types? There must be something I dont see here.
There are no union types in Dart.
The way to do this in Dart is returning/accepting dynamic as a type:
dynamic stringOrNumber() { ... }
void main() {
final value = stringOrNumber();
if (value is String) {
// Handle a string value.
} else if (value is num) {
// Handle a number.
} else {
throw ArgumentError.value(value);
}
}
See also: https://dart.dev/guides/language/sound-dart

Context dependent ANTLR4 ParseTreeVisitor implementation

I am working on a project where we migrate massive number (more than 12000) views to Hadoop/Impala from Oracle. I have written a small Java utility to extract view DDL from Oracle and would like to use ANTLR4 to traverse the AST and generate an Impala-compatible view DDL statement.
The most of the work is relatively simple, only involves re-writing some Oracle specific syntax quirks to Impala style. However, I am facing an issue, where I am not sure I have the best answer yet: we have a number of special cases, where values from a date field are extracted in multiple nested function calls. For example, the following extracts the day from a Date field:
TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(d.R_DATE , 'DD' ))
I have an ANTLR4 grammar declared for Oracle SQL and hence get the visitor callback when it reaches TO_NUMBER and TO_CHAR as well, but I would like to have special handling for this special case.
Is not there any other way than implementing the handler method for the outer function and then resorting to manual traversal of the nested structure to see
I have something like in the generated Visitor class:
#Override
public String visitNumber_function(PlSqlParser.Number_functionContext ctx) {
// FIXME: seems to be dodgy code, can it be improved?
String functionName = ctx.name.getText();
if (functionName.equalsIgnoreCase("TO_NUMBER")) {
final int childCount = ctx.getChildCount();
if (childCount == 4) {
final int functionNameIndex = 0;
final int openRoundBracketIndex = 1;
final int encapsulatedValueIndex = 2;
final int closeRoundBracketIndex = 3;
ParseTree encapsulated = ctx.getChild(encapsulatedValueIndex);
if (encapsulated instanceof TerminalNode) {
throw new IllegalStateException("TerminalNode is found at: " + encapsulatedValueIndex);
}
String customDateConversionOrNullOnOtherType =
customDateConversionFromToNumberAndNestedToChar(encapsulated);
if (customDateConversionOrNullOnOtherType != null) {
// the child node contained our expected child element, so return the converted value
return customDateConversionOrNullOnOtherType;
}
// otherwise the child was something unexpected, signalled by null
// so simply fall-back to the default handler
}
}
// some other numeric function, default handling
return super.visitNumber_function(ctx);
}
private String customDateConversionFromToNumberAndNestedToChar(ParseTree parseTree) {
// ...
}
For anyone hitting the same issue, the way to go seems to be:
changing the grammar definition and introducing custom sub-types for
the encapsulated expression of the nested function.
Then, I it is possible to hook into the processing at precisely the desired location of the Parse tree.
Using a second custom ParseTreeVisitor that captures the values of function call and delegates back the processing of the rest of the sub-tree to the main, "outer" ParseTreeVisitor.
Once the second custom ParseTreeVisitor has finished visiting all the sub-ParseTrees I had the context information I required and all the sub-tree visited properly.

Is there a way to pass a primitive parameter by reference in Dart?

I would like to pass a primitive (int, bool, ...) by reference. I found a discussion about it (paragraph "Passing value types by reference") here: value types in Dart, but I still wonder if there is a way to do it in Dart (except using an object wrapper) ? Any development ?
The Dart language does not support this and I doubt it ever will, but the future will tell.
Primitives will be passed by value, and as already mentioned here, the only way to 'pass primitives by reference' is by wrapping them like:
class PrimitiveWrapper {
var value;
PrimitiveWrapper(this.value);
}
void alter(PrimitiveWrapper data) {
data.value++;
}
main() {
var data = new PrimitiveWrapper(5);
print(data.value); // 5
alter(data);
print(data.value); // 6
}
If you don't want to do that, then you need to find another way around your problem.
One case where I see people needing to pass by reference is that they have some sort of value they want to pass to functions in a class:
class Foo {
void doFoo() {
var i = 0;
...
doBar(i); // We want to alter i in doBar().
...
i++;
}
void doBar(i) {
i++;
}
}
In this case you could just make i a class member instead.
No, wrappers are the only way.
They are passed by reference. It just doesn't matter because the "primitive" types don't have methods to change their internal value.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but maybe you are misunderstanding what "passing by reference" means? I'm assuming you want to do something like param1 = 10 and want this value to still be 10 when you return from your method. But references aren't pointers. When you assign the parameter a new value (with = operator), this change won't be reflected in the calling method. This is still true with non-primitive types (classes).
Example:
class Test {
int val;
Test(this.val);
}
void main() {
Test t = new Test(1);
fn1(t);
print(t.val); // 2
fn2(t);
print(t.val); // still 2, because "t" has been assigned a new instance in fn2()
}
void fn1(Test t) {
print(t.val); // 1
t.val = 2;
}
void fn2(Test t) {
t = new Test(10);
print(t.val); // 10
}
EDIT
I tried to make my answer more clear, based on the comments, but somehow I can't seem to phrase it right without causing more confusion. Basically, when someone coming from Java says "parameters are passed by reference", they mean what a C/C++ developer would mean by saying "parameters are passed as pointers".
As dart is compiled into JavaScript, I tried something that works for JS, and guess what!? It worked for dart!
Basically, what you can do is put your value inside an object, and then any changes made on that field value inside that function will change the value outside that function as well.
Code (You can run this on dartpad.dev)
main() {
var a = {"b": false};
print("Before passing: " + a["b"].toString());
trial(a);
print("After passing: " + a["b"].toString());
}
trial(param) {
param["b"] = true;
}
Output
Before passing: false
After passing: true
One of the way to pass the variables by reference by using the values in List. As arrays or lists are Pass by reference by default.
void main() {
List<String> name=['ali' ,'fana'];
updatename(name);
print(name);
}
updatename(List<String> name){
name[0]='gufran';
}
Try this one, This one of the simplest way to pass by reference.
You can use ValueNotifier
And, you can pass it as ValueListenable to classes or methods that needs to know up-to-date value, but should not edit it:
class Owner {
final theValue = ValueNotifier(true);
final user = User(theValue);
...
}
class User {
final ValueListeneble<bool> theValue;
User(this.theValue);
...
}
It provides more functionality than actually needed, but solves the problem.
If ValueNotifier + ValueListenable do not work for you (you want to make sure the client does not listen to every change of the value, or your package is pure Dart package and thus cannot reference Flutter libraries), use a function:
class Owner {
int _value = 0;
int getValue() => _value;
void increase() => _value++;
}
void main() {
final owner = Owner();
int Function() obtainer = owner.getValue;
print(obtainer());
owner.increase();
print(obtainer());
}
Output will be:
0
1
This approach has memory usage related downside: the obtainer will hold the reference to the owner, and this, even if owner is already not referenced, but obtainer is still reachable, owner will be also reachable
and thus will not be garbage collected.
If you do not want the downside, pass the smaller container than the entire owner:
import 'package:flutter/foundation.dart';
class ListenableAsObtainer<T> implements ValueObtainer<T> {
ListenableAsObtainer(this._listenable);
final ValueListenable<T> _listenable;
#override
T get value => _listenable.value;
}
class FunctionAsObtainer<T> implements ValueObtainer<T> {
FunctionAsObtainer(this._function);
final T Function() _function;
#override
T get value => _function();
}
class ValueAsObtainer<T> implements ValueObtainer<T> {
ValueAsObtainer(this.value);
#override
T value;
}
/// Use this interface when the client needs
/// access to the current value, but does not need the value to be listenable,
/// i.e. [ValueListenable] would be too strong requirement.
abstract class ValueObtainer<T> {
T get value;
}
The usage of FunctionAsObtainer will still result in holding the owner from garbage collection, but two other options will not.
Just to make it clear:
void main() {
var list1 = [0,1,2];
var modifiedList1 = addMutable(list1, 3);
var list2 = [0,1,2];
var modifiedList2 = addImmutable(list2, 3);
print(list1);
print(modifiedList1);
print(list2);
print(modifiedList2);
}
List<int> addMutable(List<int> list, int element){
return list..add(element);
}
List<int> addImmutable(List<int> list, int element){
return [...list, element];
}
Output:
[0, 1, 2, 3]
[0, 1, 2, 3]
[0, 1, 2]
[0, 1, 2, 3]
All variables are passed by value. If a variable contains a primitive (int, bool, etc.), that's it. You got its value. You can do with it whatever you want, it won't affect the source value. If a variable contains an object, what it really contains is a reference to that object.
The reference itself is also passed by value, but the object it references is not passed at all. It just stayed where it was. This means that you can actually make changes to this very object.
Therefore, if you pass a List and if you .add() something to it, you have internally changed it, like it is passed by reference. But if you use the spread operator [...list], you are creating a fresh new copy of it. In most cases that is what you really want to do.
Sounds complicated. Isn't really. Dart is cool.

How to prevent function return result declaratively?

Assume such conditions:
Some operation does not provide possibility of returning the result.
This operation declared as callback
Using typedef not recommended
Some operation provide of returning the result.
This operation declared as callback
Using typedef not recommended
Assume such scenario:
void main() {
executeVoidOperation(methodNonVoid); // Must throw if method void?
executeNonVoidOperation(methodVoid); // Must throw if method non-void?
}
int methodNonVoid() {
return 0;
}
void methodVoid() {
}
void executeVoidOperation(void operation()) {
operation(); // Must throw if method non-void?
}
void executeNonVoidOperation(dynamic operation()) {
var result = operation(); // Must throw if method void?
print(result); // Result of void operation? (if such passed as argument)
}
Displayed results:
null
Questions (where I wrong?):
Null is object. From where this null appeared (as result) if void function cannot return result (even null)?
Functions with different return types in Dart assumed as the same (not conflicting) types?
How in Dart called this function transformations?
executeNonVoidOperation(methodVoid); works because the callback is defined as dynamic operation(). dynamic can be anything, including void. It's the same as if you just don't specify a type.
The null value stems from a simple rule in Dart. Quoted from the Dart Language Tour:
All functions return a value. If no return value is specified, the statement return null; is implicitly appended to the function body.
That means that every void method always returns null. If you try to return something else, you'll get a runtime error (in checked mode).
executeVoidOperation(methodNonVoid); is a bit more tricky - I'd expect it to throw a runtime error, but it seems the callback is treated as dynamic operation() instead of void operation(). Dart Editor's analyzer seems to think that, too. This may be either a bug or a design choice by the Dart team.

Resources