I'm writing a testing utility function and would like to pass a class member name and get its value. Could I use Symbols for this? My test code looks like this
class Foo {
String a = 'A';
String b = 'B';
static void output(Symbol symbol) {
debugPrint("The value is '$symbol'");
}
}
Foo.output(#a);
I'm trying to get a result like The value is 'A' but I'm getting The value is 'Symbol("a")'?
Getting the value of something by name, where the name is a value, and at runtime, that is reflection.
You need dart:mirrors for that, which isn't available on most platforms.
Better yet, don't do it at all. Dart has first class functions, so you can pass in a function accessing the variable instead:
class Foo {
String a = 'A';
String b = 'B';
static void output(String read(Foo value)) {
debugPrint("The value is '${read(this)}'");
}
}
void main() {
var foo = Foo();
foo.output((f) => f.a);
foo.output((f) => f.b);
}
Related
This question already has answers here:
"The operator can’t be unconditionally invoked because the receiver can be null" error after migrating to Dart null-safety
(3 answers)
Closed 12 months ago.
I have migrated my Dart code to NNBD / Null Safety. Some of it looks like this:
class Foo {
String? _a;
void foo() {
if (_a != null) {
_a += 'a';
}
}
}
class Bar {
Bar() {
_a = 'a';
}
String _a;
}
This causes two analysis errors. For _a += 'a';:
An expression whose value can be 'null' must be null-checked before it can be dereferenced.
Try checking that the value isn't 'null' before dereferencing it.
For Bar() {:
Non-nullable instance field '_a' must be initialized.
Try adding an initializer expression, or add a field initializer in this constructor, or mark it 'late'.
In both cases I have already done exactly what the error suggests! What's up with that?
I'm using Dart 2.12.0-133.2.beta (Tue Dec 15).
Edit: I found this page which says:
The analyzer can’t model the flow of your whole application, so it can’t predict the values of global variables or class fields.
But that doesn't make sense to me - there's only one possible flow control path from if (_a != null) to _a += 'a'; in this case - there's no async code and Dart is single-threaded - so it doesn't matter that _a isn't local.
And the error message for Bar() explicitly states the possibility of initialising the field in the constructor.
The problem is that class fields can be overridden even if it is marked as final. The following example illustrates the problem:
class A {
final String? text = 'hello';
String? getText() {
if (text != null) {
return text;
} else {
return 'WAS NULL!';
}
}
}
class B extends A {
bool first = true;
#override
String? get text {
if (first) {
first = false;
return 'world';
} else {
return null;
}
}
}
void main() {
print(A().getText()); // hello
print(B().getText()); // null
}
The B class overrides the text final field so it returns a value the first time it is asked but returns null after this. You cannot write your A class in such a way that you can prevent this form of overrides from being allowed.
So we cannot change the return value of getText from String? to String even if it looks like we checks the text field for null before returning it.
An expression whose value can be 'null' must be null-checked before it can be dereferenced. Try checking that the value isn't 'null' before dereferencing it.
It seems like this really does only work for local variables. This code has no errors:
class Foo {
String? _a;
void foo() {
final a = _a;
if (a != null) {
a += 'a';
_a = a;
}
}
}
It kind of sucks though. My code is now filled with code that just copies class members to local variables and back again. :-/
Non-nullable instance field '_a' must be initialized. Try adding an initializer expression, or add a field initializer in this constructor, or mark it 'late'.
Ah so it turns out a "field initializer" is actually like this:
class Bar {
Bar() : _a = 'a';
String _a;
}
There are few ways to deal with this situation. I've given a detailed answer here so I'm only writing the solutions from it:
Use local variable (Recommended)
void foo() {
var a = this.a; // <-- Local variable
if (a != null) {
a += 'a';
this.a = a;
}
}
Use ??
void foo() {
var a = (this.a ?? '') + 'a';
this.a = a;
}
Use Bang operator (!)
You should only use this solution when you're 100% sure that the variable (a) is not null at the time you're using it.
void foo() {
a = a! + 'a'; // <-- Bang operator
}
To answer your second question:
Non-nullable fields should always be initialized. There are generally three ways of initializing them:
In the declaration:
class Bar {
String a = 'a';
}
In the initializing formal
class Bar {
String a;
Bar({required this.a});
}
In the initializer list:
class Bar {
String a;
Bar(String b) : a = b;
}
You can create your classes in null-safety like this
class JobDoc {
File? docCam1;
File? docCam2;
File? docBarcode;
File? docSignature;
JobDoc({this.docCam1, this.docCam2, this.docBarcode, this.docSignature});
JobDoc.fromJson(Map<String, dynamic> json) {
docCam1 = json['docCam1'] ?? null;
docCam2 = json['docCam2'] ?? null;
docBarcode = json['docBarcode'] ?? null;
docSignature = json['docSignature'] ?? null;
}
}
I am passing a Function as an optional parameter to the constructor but I can't assign a default value.
void main() {
Person p = Person();
print(p.foo('Hello'));
}
class Person {
final String Function(String) foo;
Person({this.foo});
}
now trying to assign a default value: Person({this.foo = (val) {return val;});
produces the error: Error: Not a constant expression. I am aware the parameter must be const but using const or even static infront of (val) {return val;} does not work.
Does anyone have an idea how to solve this problem?
You can try this:
void main() {
Person pLower = Person(foo: (a) => a.toLowerCase());
print(pLower.foo('Hello'));
Person pDefault = Person();
print(pDefault.foo('Hello'));
}
class Person {
static String defaultFoo(String a) => a.toUpperCase();
final String Function(String) foo;
Person({this.foo = defaultFoo});
}
Output
hello
HELLO
You can only use constant values (aka. compile-time constants) as default values.
You cannot create a constant function literal, so there is no way to write the function in-line in the constructor.
However, references to top-level or static functions are constants, so you can declare the default value function as a static function or top-level function.
void main() {
Person p = Person();
print(p.foo('Hello')); // Prints "Hello"
}
class Person {
final String Function(String) foo;
Person({this.foo = _identity});
static String _identity(String value) => value;
}
// or as top-level.
// String _identity(String value) => value;
You can (and should) choose to make the function public if the default value is on an instance method, and you expect anyone to extend or implement your class. In that case, they need to declare the same default value.
Another option, which is often at least as useful, is to not use a default value, but replace a null before using the value:
class Person {
final String Function(String) foo;
Person({String Function(String) foo}) : foo = foo ?? _identity;
static String _identity(String value) => value;
}
or even using a non-constant value:
class Person {
final String Function(String) foo;
Person({String Function(String) foo}) : foo = (foo ?? (String x) => x);
}
For a constructor, it makes very little difference. If it was an instance method instead, using ?? to replace null avoids subclasses having to use the exact same function as default value.
Personally I recommend always using ?? instead of a default value. It's more flexible since it allows non-constant values. For non-function default values, you'll have to document the default behavior instead of just letting the dartDoc show {int x = 42}, but for functions, you'll have to document them anyway.
I trying make the following code but T only can be int, double or a custom class. I couldn't find how to restrict the type in Dart or something that work like where from C#. How can I do that in Dart?
class Array3dG<T> extends ListBase<T> {
List<T> l = List<T>();
Array3dG(List<T> list) {
l = list;
}
set length(int newLength) { l.length = newLength; }
int get length => l.length;
T operator [](int index) => l[index];
void operator []=(int index, T value) { l[index] = value; }
}
There is no way to constrain the type variable at compile-time. You can only have one bound on a type variable, and the only bound satisfying both int and your custom class is Object.
As suggested by #Mattia, you can check at run-time and throw in the constructor if the type parameter is not one of the ones you supprt:
Array3dG(this.list) {
if (this is! Array3dG<int> &&
this is! Array3dG<double> &&
this is! Array3dG<MyClass>) {
throw ArgumentError('Unsupported element type $T');
}
}
This prevents creating an instance of something wrong, but doesn't catch it at compile-time.
Another option is to have factory methods instead of constructors:
class Array3dG<T> {
List<T> list;
Array3dG._(this.list);
static Array3dG<int> fromInt(List<int> list) => Array3dG<int>._(list);
static Array3dG<int> fromDouble(List<double> list) => Array3dG<double>._(list);
static Array3dG<MyClass> fromMyClass(List<MyClass> list) => Array3dG<MyClass>._(list);
...
}
which you then use as Array3dG.fromInt(listOfInt). It looks like a named constructor, but it is just a static factory method (so no using new in front).
You can check at runtime the type with the is keyword:
Array3dG(List<T> list) {
if (list is List<int>) {
//Handle int
}
else if (list is List<double>) {
//Handle double
}
else if (list is List<MyClass>) {
//Handle MyClass
}
else {
throw ArgumentError('Unsupported $T type');
}
}
Note that if you are handling int and double in the same way you can just check for num
You can check the progress of the Union types here: https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/issues/4938
Let's say I have this code inside a class:
String _str;
String get str => _str;
void set(String s) {
assert(_str == null);
_str = s;
}
How could I ensure that only the setter and getter have access to _str? This would be to prevent that anything inside the same class would be unable to bypass the condition.
There is no way. In Dart privacy is per library. Everything within one library can read/write everything else within that library.
I would go for
String __str;
String get str => __str;
void set(String s) {
assert(__str == null);
__str = s;
}
and just never access members that start with two underscores except from within the associated getter/setter pairs.
I do this sometimes when I want a private field with private getter setter like
String __str;
String get _str => __str;
void _set(String s) {
assert(_str == null);
__str = s;
}
A weird workaround would be to create a class in another library like
class StringProperty {
String _str;
String get value => _str;
void set value(String s) {
assert(_str == null);
_str = s;
}
}
and then use it in your library like
final StringProperty str = new StringProperty();
You can then access the value then like
str.value = 'abc';
print(str.value);
and in no other way.
If I have a class with a setter defined, how do I reference then generated method as a function from an instance of that class. The spec sort of suggests it would be the id of the variable + '=" (seems daft), but this doesn't parse.
So for example:
class Bar {
set foo(int value) {
//whatever
}
}
typedef F(int value);
void main() {
F f = new Bar().foo=; //Fails, but what should this be??
f(5);
}
The setter is named foo= but this is not something you can reference in the way you want. Even looking at dart:mirrors the MethodMirror (the mirror for object methods including setters) has no way of invoking it. You could easily rewrite this as:
class Bar {
set foo(int value) {
//whatever
}
}
typedef F(int value);
void main() {
Bar b = new Bar();
F f = (int value) => b.foo = value;
f(5);
}