Using an 'is' expression when the right-hand operand is a variable? - dart

I am trying to write a function that takes two arguments: givenType and targetType. If these two arguments match, I want givenType to be returned, otherwise null.
For this objective, I am trying to utilize Dart's is expression (maybe there is a better way to go about it, I am open to suggestions). Initially, I thought it would be as simple as writing this:
matchesTarget(givenType, targetType) {
if (givenType is targetType) {
return givenType;
}
return null;
}
But this produces an error:
The name 'targetType' isn't a type and can't be used in an 'is'
expression. Try correcting the name to match an existing
type.dart(type_test_with_non_type)
I tried looking up what satisfies an is expression but cannot seem to find it in the documentation. It seems like it needs its right-hand operand to be known at compile-time (hoping this is wrong, but it does not seem like I can use a variable), but if so, how else can I achieve the desired effect?

I cant guess the purpose of the function (or the scenario where it would be used, so if you can clarify it would be great). First of all, I don't know if you are passing "types" as arguments. And yes, you need to specify in compile time the right hand argument of the is function.
Meanwhile, if you are passing types, with one change, you can check if the types passed to your function at runtime.
matchesTarget(Type givenType, Type targetType) {
print('${givenType.runtimeType} ${targetType.runtimeType}');
if (givenType == targetType) {
return givenType;
}
return null;
}
main(){
var a = int; //this is a Type
var b = String; //this is also a Type
print(matchesTarget(a,b)); //You are passing different Types, so it will return null
var c = int; //this is also a Type
print(matchesTarget(a,c)); //You are passing same Types, so it will return int
}
But if you are passing variables, the solution is pretty similar:
matchesTarget(givenVar, targetVar) {
print('${givenVar.runtimeType} ${targetVar.runtimeType}');
if (givenVar.runtimeType == targetVar.runtimeType) {
return givenVar.runtimeType;
}
return null;
}
main(){
var a = 10; //this is a variable (int)
var b = "hello"; //this is also a variable (String)
print(matchesTarget(a,b)); //this will return null
var c = 12; //this is also a variable (int)
print(matchesTarget(a,c)); //this will return int
}
The Final Answer
matchesTarget(givenVar, targetType) {
print('${givenVar.runtimeType} ${targetType}');
if (givenVar.runtimeType == targetType) {
return givenVar;
}
return null;
}
main(){
var a = 10; //this is a variable (int)
var b = String; //this is a type (String)
print(matchesTarget(a,b)); //this will return null because 'a' isnt a String
var c = int; //this is also a type (int)
print(matchesTarget(a,c)); //this will return the value of 'a' (10)
}

The as, is, and is! operators are handy for checking types at runtime.
The is operator in Dart can be only used for type checking and not checking if two values are equal.
The result of obj is T is true if obj implements the interface specified by T. For example, obj is Object is always true.
See the below code for an example of how to use the is operator
if (emp is Person) {
// Type check
emp.firstName = 'Bob';
}
Even the error message that you're getting says that
The name 'targetType' isn't a type and can't be used in an 'is'
expression.
So the bottomline is that you can use is only for checking if a variable or value belongs to a particular data type.
For checking equality, you can use the == operator if comparing primitive types, or write your own method for comparing the values. Hope this helps!

Related

How to convert int to double and vice-versa when parsing using num.parse?

Minimal reproducible code:
void main() {
print(foo<int>('1'));
print(foo<double>('1.0'));
print(foo<double>('1'));
print(foo<int>('1.0'));
}
T foo<T extends num>(String s) {
final res = num.parse(s);
return (T == double ? res.toDouble() : res.toInt()) as T;
}
As you can see I'm manually handling the types. Is there any better way to do it?
I don't see a much better solution. You have a function which changes behavior entirely based on the type argument. Since all you can do with a type argument is subtype-checks, or comparing it to a constant type literal, you need to do something like that.
I'd prefer subtype-checks, because that also allows promotion, but for something limited like this, where there are only four possible types for T, checking Type object equality can also work. There'll just need to be at least one as T before returning.
Either approach also only works for type hierarchies which are finite, and you account for all the possible types. Even here, the current code is not covering <num> and <Never> which are also valid type arguments for the bound num. So, be vigilant.
Maybe, using subtype checks for promotion:
T parse<T extends num>(String source) {
var value = num.parse(source);
if (value is T) return value;
// T is not `num`.
num d = value.toDouble();
if (d is T) return d; // T was double.
try {
num n = value.toInt(); // Can fail for Infinity/NaN
if (n is T) return n; // T was int
} catch (_) {
// T was `int` after all, so throwing was correct.
if (1 is T) rethrow; // T was int, but the input was not valid.
}
// T was neither num, double, nor int, so must be `Never`.
throw ArgumentError.value(T, "T", "Must not be Never");
}
Or. using Type object equality:
T parse<T extends num>(String source) {
var value = num.parse(source);
switch (T) {
case num: return value as T;
case int: return value.toInt() as T;
case double: return value.toDouble() as T;
default:
throw ArgumentError.value(T, "T", "Must not be Never");
}
}

Truthy and falsy values in Dart programming language

I just stand in front of a very weird part in dart, I didn't find an answer on the internet, No truthy and falsy values in dart?!
for example,
const x = "foo";
void main(){
if(x){
print("x is set")
}
}
In JavaScript we do this things very easily, how can I do that in Dart?!
Dart is a statically typed language, so x is a String, and you can't check if a string is true or false.
if you want to check if x has a value or not, you can do the following
String x = 'hi';
if (x?.isNotEmpty ?? false) {
print("x is set");
}
After some researches, I've found that in order to check for a dynamiclly assigned variable, where in case you're not sure if the variable will be set to a number or a string for example, you need to check if the variable is not equal to null.
For example:
void main(){
var a;
if(true){
a = "The variable is set to string";
}
else if(false){
a = 12; //the variable is set to a number
}
//Now, to check:
if(a != null){
print("A is set, WOW Dart is working! I thought it's garbage!");
}
}
In case the both statements are false, the variable will still be a null.

How to return two specific types from a generic method?

T getValue<T>(int i) {
if (T == String) return '$i'; // Error
return i; // Error
}
void main() {
var s = getValue<String>(1);
var i = getValue<int>(1);
}
I want getValue to return string if T is String and int otherwise. How to do that?
You can't restrict the type parameter to just int or String, so it will have to accept more than that (at least their least common supertype, Object, so basically any type).
It's not a particularly helpful way to code. It's possible, but not recommended:
T getValue<T>(int i) {
if (i is T) return i;
return "$i" as T;
}
This will return the int if T allows it (so T being any of int, or a super type of int, which is num, Object, dynamic or void, or any number of Comparable<X> wrappings around any any of those supertypes), and otherwise try to return a string. That will fail with a type error unless T is String (since we've already ruled out all supertypes of String).
You can still call it as getValue<bool>(42) and watch it fail, so the type argument doesn't help with correctness.
It's not particularly effective. I'd rather do:
dynamic getValue(int i, {bool toString = false}) {
if (toString) return "$i";
return i;
}
and call it as:
String x = getValue(42, toString: true); // Add `as String` if you disable downcasts.
int y = getValue(42); // And `as int` here.
The type parameter is really just making things harder. You are going to cast or type-check the result anyway, so might as well do it at the call point, rather than introduce type variables that aren't actually preventing misuse anyway.
(I'd probably just do two different functions, but I assume that there is a reason for wanting one function).
As I mentioned in the comments, I don't see any way that you could use your generic as the return type of your getValue function. Even assuming the return under the if statement worked, there is nothing that can be done about trying to return int i when List is passed as the type. You'll be trying to return an int as a List.
If you change it to dynamic, your code will work fine as it's just using the generic as another parameter.
dynamic getValue<T>(int i) {
if (T == String) return '$i';
return i;
}
void main() {
var s = getValue<String>(1);
var i = getValue<int>(1);
}

Why does `if (var = null)` compile in dart?

I've recently came across this question How do I solve the 'Failed assertion: boolean expression must not be null' exception in Flutter
where the problem comes from a should be invalid code that gets treated as valid.
This code can be summarized as :
int stuff;
if (stuff = null) { // = instead of ==
}
But why does this code compiles ? As the following will not.
int stuff;
if (stuff = 42) {
}
With the following compile error :
Conditions must have a static type of 'bool'.
So I'd expect out of consistency that if (stuff = null) to gives the same error.
null is a valid value for a bool variable in Dart, at least until Dart supports non-nullable types.
bool foo = null;
or just
bool foo;
is valid.
Therefore in the first case there is nothing wrong from a statical analysis point of view.
In the 2nd case the type int is inferred because of the assignment, which is known to not be a valid boolean value.
bool foo = 42;
is invalid.
When you say var stuff; with no initial value it is giving stuff a static type of dynamic. Since dyamic might be a bool, it's legal to assign null to a variable of type dynamic, and it's legal to use a possibly null bool in a conditional, the compiler doesn't flag this. When you say int stuff; the compiler knows that stuff could not be a bool. The reported error in that case is cause by the static type of stuff, not the assignment to null.
Edit: Got the real answer from someone who knows how to read the spec.
The static type of an assignment expression is the right hand side of the assignment. So the expression stuff = null has the static type of Null which is assignable to bool.
The reasoning is that the value of an assignment is the right hand side, so it makes sense to also use it's type. This allows expressions like:
int foo;
num bar;
foo = bar = 1;
Commonly assignment operation returns the value that it assigns.
int a = 0;
print(a = 3);//Prints 3
So,
When stuff = null,
'stuff = null' returns null. if statement needs a boolean .null is a sub-Type of boolean.
if(null){}
is valid
When stuff = 42,
'stuff = 42' returns 42. if statement needs a boolean .42 is not a sub-Type of boolean.
if(42){}
is not valid

Use question mark operator when calling method on possible null value?

I have a varible containing an object which might be null. When trying to call a method I have to check for null. I want the result to be false if the variable is null. What is considered good and readable style to to this?
e.g.
class MyClass {
bool boolMethod() {
return true;
}
}
void main() {
MyClass mc = new MyClass();
MyClass mcnull = null;
bool val1 = mc?.boolMethod();
bool val1null = mcnull?.boolMethod();
bool val2 = mc != null && mc.boolMethod();
bool val2null = mcnull != null && mcnull.boolMethod();
}
Especially when used in if-statements I consider the first version much more readable:
if (mc?.boolMethod())...
versus
if (mc != null && mc.boolMethod())...
But IntelliJ gives me the hint The value of the '?.' operator can be 'null' which isn't appropriate as an operand of a locaical operator. (null_aware_in_logical_operator). Ok - this is right because when the variable is null then I use the null as a boolean value. But it's ok in my case and I try to avoid suppressing warnings.
What is the suggested way? Other ideas?
I think a common pattern is
bool val1 = (mc?.boolMethod() ?? false);
The parens aren't required here but if such expressions are embedded into more complex expressions they are often necessary to get the expected behavior because of the low priority of ??

Resources