I try to define a ValueHash similar to the ValueList example in the Vala tutorial:
[Compact]
public class ValueHash : HashTable<string, Value?> {
[CCode (has_construct_function = false)]
protected ValueHash ();
}
Compiling this with valac 0.22 yields an
error: unable to chain up to base constructor requiring arguments
protected ValueHash ();
Searching the net I figured a call to the bas() constructor is needed, but how?
Trying out (I know that null is not a valid argument here):
protected ValueHash () { base(null, null); }
yields:
error: too few arguments to function ‘g_hash_table_new_full’
protected ValueHash () { base(null, null); }
OK, probably need one argument more?
protected ValueHash () { base(null, null, null); }
yields:
error: Too many arguments, method `GLib.HashTable<string,GLib.Value?>'
does not take 3 arguments
protected ValueHash () { base(null, null, null); }
I cannot figure out what's going on here. As gobject already defines a ValueArray in the GLib namespace, a ValueHash would come in handy there, but incidentally this looks to be defined in libsoup-2.4, but I don't want to introduce a dependency on libsoup in my
code.
Thanks for any hints.
I'm not sure if there is a way to chain up to the 2-parameter constructor (or if what you are seeing is really a bug) but I believe calling the 4-parameter version explicitly works in any case:
[Compact]
public class ValueHash : HashTable<string, Value?> {
[CCode (has_construct_function = false)]
protected ValueHash () {
base.full (str_hash, str_equal, null, null);
}
}
Related
The question came into my mind when I've declared a final callback in a class, and the constructor can be declared as const, and trying to make a constant value of a function like so:
class MyClass {
final void Function() callback;
const MyClass(this.callback);
}
void example1() {
const foo = MyClass(() {});
}
This gives the error:
Why can I delcare a constant constructor in the first place? What would make an object of MyClass compile-time constant if no function value can be constant?
A simpler example:
typedef MyVoidCallback = void Function();
void example2() {
const MyVoidCallback bar = () {};
}
This gives the error:
Thank you in advance
It is because () {} is not a constant value, it is rather creating a new instance every time. All functions in dart inherit Function class which doesn't have const constructor.
However, since functions are top-level members in dart, you can pass them by name (like a variable). So if you define your function outside of any class such that it is a global function, you can pass it as a parameter value in a const constructor.
UPDATE from #randal-schwartz comment: Static functions inside a class can also be passed into these const constructors as parameters.
Below code should work:
class MyClass {
final void Function() callback;
const MyClass(this.callback);
}
void example1() {
const foo = MyClass(doWork);
}
void doWork() {
// TODO: do work
}
I want to create a new object of given type inside of generic in Vala language.
class MyClass <T> : GLib.Object
{
protected T data;
public MyClass ()
{
data = new T ();
}
}
I understand that this can't work, but what is the way to do something like that?
You are probably best instantiating it when calling the constructor for MyClass:
void main () {
new MyClass<Test> (new Test ());
new MyClass<Example> (new Example ());
}
class MyClass <T>
{
protected T data;
public MyClass (T data)
{
this.data = data;
}
}
class Test {}
class Example {}
Vala generics do not currently provide constraints. If you are going to pass in a dependency in this way you may want to consider using an interface type instead of a generic type.
Update
If you are wanting to implement a factory then an interface with a static method or function is probably best:
void main () {
var a = CommandFactory.get_command ("A");
var b = CommandFactory.get_command ("B");
a.run ();
b.run ();
}
namespace CommandFactory {
Command get_command (string criteria) {
Command result = null;
switch (criteria) {
case "A":
result = new CommandA ();
break;
case "B":
result = new CommandB ();
break;
default:
assert_not_reached ();
}
return result;
}
}
interface Command:Object {
public abstract void run ();
}
class CommandA:Object, Command {
void run () { print ("A\n"); }
}
class CommandB:Object, Command {
void run () { print ("B\n"); }
}
I assume by 'abstract fabric pattern' you mean 'abstract factory pattern'? You could try using GType introspection to then instantiate the Object, but it must be a GObject and you by pass Vala's static analysis checks:
void main () {
new MyClass<Example> (new Example ());
/* These will fail at runtime
new MyClass<string> ("this will fail at runtime");
new MyClass<ThisWillFailAtRuntime> (new ThisWillFailAtRuntime ());
*/
}
class MyClass <T>
{
protected T data;
public MyClass (T data)
{
assert (typeof(T).is_object());
this.data = Object.new (typeof(T));
}
}
class Example:Object {}
class ThisWillFailAtRuntime {}
Note that Object.new() is also a static method.
I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve, but you are probably better looking more closely at interfaces and favouring composition over inheritance in your object data model.
Is it possible in Dart to store a callback function with return and argument type information? It appears I can do the following:
class MyClass {
void addCallback( callback( int ) )
{
_callback = callback;
}
var _callback;
}
But I thought it would be nice if _callback wasn't declared as var, and instead had information about its return and argument types. I couldn't find info on this in the docs, anyone know?
Dart 2 supports a function type syntax:
class MyClass {
void addCallback( callback( int ) )
{
_callback = callback;
}
void Function(int) _callback;
}
The Effective Dart Design Guide states that this form is preferred over typedefs.
You can typedef a Function signature like this:
typedef bool Filter(num x);
List<num> filterNumbers(List<num> numbers, Filter filter) {
return numbers.where(filter).toList();
}
For more great information like this, check out this article: https://www.dartlang.org/articles/idiomatic-dart/
I was wondering if is possible to create an instance of a generic type in Dart. In other languages like Java you could work around this using reflection, but I'm not sure if this is possible in Dart.
I have this class:
class GenericController <T extends RequestHandler> {
void processRequest() {
T t = new T(); // ERROR
}
}
I tried mezonis approach with the Activator and it works. But it is an expensive approach as it uses mirrors, which requires you to use "mirrorsUsed" if you don't want to have a 2-4MB js file.
This morning I had the idea to use a generic typedef as generator and thus get rid of reflection:
You define a method type like this: (Add params if necessary)
typedef S ItemCreator<S>();
or even better:
typedef ItemCreator<S> = S Function();
Then in the class that needs to create the new instances:
class PagedListData<T>{
...
ItemCreator<T> creator;
PagedListData(ItemCreator<T> this.creator) {
}
void performMagic() {
T item = creator();
...
}
}
Then you can instantiate the PagedList like this:
PagedListData<UserListItem> users
= new PagedListData<UserListItem>(()=> new UserListItem());
You don't lose the advantage of using generic because at declaration time you need to provide the target class anyway, so defining the creator method doesn't hurt.
You can use similar code:
import "dart:mirrors";
void main() {
var controller = new GenericController<Foo>();
controller.processRequest();
}
class GenericController<T extends RequestHandler> {
void processRequest() {
//T t = new T();
T t = Activator.createInstance(T);
t.tellAboutHimself();
}
}
class Foo extends RequestHandler {
void tellAboutHimself() {
print("Hello, I am 'Foo'");
}
}
abstract class RequestHandler {
void tellAboutHimself();
}
class Activator {
static createInstance(Type type, [Symbol constructor, List
arguments, Map<Symbol, dynamic> namedArguments]) {
if (type == null) {
throw new ArgumentError("type: $type");
}
if (constructor == null) {
constructor = const Symbol("");
}
if (arguments == null) {
arguments = const [];
}
var typeMirror = reflectType(type);
if (typeMirror is ClassMirror) {
return typeMirror.newInstance(constructor, arguments,
namedArguments).reflectee;
} else {
throw new ArgumentError("Cannot create the instance of the type '$type'.");
}
}
}
I don't know if this is still useful to anyone. But I have found an easy workaround. In the function you want to initialize the type T, pass an extra argument of type T Function(). This function should return an instance of T. Now whenever you want to create object of T, call the function.
class foo<T> {
void foo(T Function() creator) {
final t = creator();
// use t
}
}
P.S. inspired by Patrick's answer
2022 answer
Just came across this problem and found out that although instantiating using T() is still not possible, you can get the constructor of an object easier with SomeClass.new in dart>=2.15.
So what you could do is:
class MyClass<T> {
final T Function() creator;
MyClass(this.creator);
T getGenericInstance() {
return creator();
}
}
and when using it:
final myClass = MyClass<SomeOtherClass>(SomeOtherClass.new)
Nothing different but looks cleaner imo.
Here's my work around for this sad limitation
class RequestHandler {
static final _constructors = {
RequestHandler: () => RequestHandler(),
RequestHandler2: () => RequestHandler2(),
};
static RequestHandler create(Type type) {
return _constructors[type]();
}
}
class RequestHandler2 extends RequestHandler {}
class GenericController<T extends RequestHandler> {
void processRequest() {
//T t = new T(); // ERROR
T t = RequestHandler.create(T);
}
}
test() {
final controller = GenericController<RequestHandler2>();
controller.processRequest();
}
Sorry but as far as I know, a type parameter cannot be used to name a constructor in an instance creation expression in Dart.
Working with FLutter
typedef S ItemCreator<S>();
mixin SharedExtension<T> {
T getSPData(ItemCreator<T> creator) async {
return creator();
}
}
Abc a = sharedObj.getSPData(()=> Abc());
P.S. inspired by Patrick
simple like that.
import 'dart:mirrors';
void main(List<String> args) {
final a = A<B>();
final b1 = a.getInstance();
final b2 = a.getInstance();
print('${b1.value}|${b1.text}|${b1.hashCode}');
print('${b2.value}|${b2.text}|${b2.hashCode}');
}
class A<T extends B> {
static int count = 0;
T getInstance() {
return reflectClass(T).newInstance(
Symbol(''),
['Text ${++count}'],
{Symbol('value'): count},
).reflectee;
}
}
class B {
final int value;
final String text;
B(this.text, {required this.value});
}
Inspired by Patrick's answer, this is the factory I ended up with.
class ServiceFactory<T> {
static final Map<Type, dynamic> _cache = <String, dynamic>{};
static T getInstance<T>(T Function() creator) {
String typeName = T.toString();
return _cache.putIfAbsent(typeName, () => creator());
}
}
Then I would use it like this.
final authClient = ServiceFactory.getInstance<AuthenticationClient>(() => AuthenticationClient());
Warning: Erik made a very good point in the comment below that the same type name can exist in multiple packages and that will cause issues. As much as I dislike to force the user to pass in a string key (that way it's the consumer's responsibility to ensuring the uniqueness of the type name), that might be the only way.
I am looking for a way to create a function with a variable number of arguments or parameters in Dart. I know I could create an array parameter instead, but I would prefer to not do that because I'm working on a library where syntactic brevity is important.
For example, in plain JavaScript, we could do something like this (borrowed from here):
function superHeroes() {
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
console.log("There's no stopping " + arguments[i]);
}
}
superHeroes('UberMan', 'Exceptional Woman', 'The Hunk');
However, in dart, that code will not run. Is there a way to do the same thing in dart? If not, is this something that is on the roadmap?
You can't do that for now.
I don't really know if varargs will come back - they were there some times ago but have been removed.
However it is possible to emulate varargs with Emulating functions. See the below code snippet.
typedef OnCall = dynamic Function(List arguments);
class VarargsFunction {
VarargsFunction(this._onCall);
final OnCall _onCall;
noSuchMethod(Invocation invocation) {
if (!invocation.isMethod || invocation.namedArguments.isNotEmpty)
super.noSuchMethod(invocation);
final arguments = invocation.positionalArguments;
return _onCall(arguments);
}
}
main() {
final superHeroes = VarargsFunction((arguments) {
for (final superHero in arguments) {
print("There's no stopping ${superHero}");
}
}) as dynamic;
superHeroes('UberMan', 'Exceptional Woman', 'The Hunk');
}
Dart does indirectly support var-args as long as you aren't too much into syntactic brevity.
void testFunction([List<dynamic> args=[]])
{
for(dynamic arg:args)
{
// Handle each arg...
}
}
testFunction([0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]);
testFunction();
testFunction([0, 1, 2]);
Note: You can do the same thing with named parameters, but you'll have to handle things internally, just in case if the user (of that function; which could be you) decides to not pass any value to that named parameter.
I would like to thank #Ladicek for indirectly letting me know that a word like brevity exists in English.
This version:
Works with both positional and keyword arguments.
Supports typing of the return value.
Works with modern Dart.
typedef VarArgsCallback = void Function(List<dynamic> args, Map<String, dynamic> kwargs);
class VarArgsFunction {
final VarArgsCallback callback;
static var _offset = 'Symbol("'.length;
VarArgsFunction(this.callback);
void call() => callback([], {});
#override
dynamic noSuchMethod(Invocation inv) {
return callback(
inv.positionalArguments,
inv.namedArguments.map(
(_k, v) {
var k = _k.toString();
return MapEntry(k.substring(_offset, k.length - 2), v);
},
),
);
}
}
void main() {
dynamic myFunc = VarArgsFunction((args, kwargs) {
print('Got args: $args, kwargs: $kwargs');
});
myFunc(1, 2, x: true, y: false); // Got args: [1, 2], kwargs: {x: true, y: false}
}
Thanks, Alexandre for your answer!
I played around a little with Alexandre Ardhuin's answer and found that we can tweak a couple of things to make this work in the current version of Dart:
class VarArgsClass {
noSuchMethod(InvocationMirror invocation) {
if (invocation.memberName == 'superheroes') {
this.superheroes(invocation.positionalArguments);
}
}
void superheroes(List<String> heroNames) {
for (final superHero in heroNames) {
print("There's no stopping ${superHero}!");
}
}
}
main() {
new VarArgsClass().superheroes('UberMan', 'Exceptional Woman', 'The Hunk');
}
This has lots of problems, including:
A warning is generated wherever you call superheroes() because the signature doesn't match your parameters.
More manual checking would need to be done to make sure the list of arguments passed to superheroes is really a List<String>.
Needing to check the member name in noSuchMethod() makes it more likely you'll forget to change the 'superheroes' string if you change the method name.
Reflection makes the code path harder to trace.
BUT if you are fine with all of those issues, then this gets the job done.
If you are really into syntactic brevity, just declare a function/method with say 10 optional positional parameters and be done. It's unlikely someone will call that with more than 10 arguments.
If it sounds like a hack, that's because it is a hack. But I've seen the Dart team doing the same :-)
For example:
void someMethod(arg0, [arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5, arg6, arg7, arg8, arg9]) {
final args = [arg0, arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5, arg6, arg7, arg8, arg9];
args.removeWhere((value) => value == null);
/* do something the the args List */
print(args);
}
For the example you've written, I think you're best off using a list. Sorry about that!
I'm looking at dartbug.com, but I don't see a feature request for this. You're definitely welcome to create one!