Effective Dart: Usage

You can use these guidelines every day in the bodies of your Dart code. Users of your library may not be able to tell that you've internalized the ideas here, but maintainers of it sure will.

These guidelines help you compose your program out of multiple files in a consistent, maintainable way. To keep these guidelines brief, they use "import" to cover import and export directives. The guidelines apply equally to both.

Linter rule: use_string_in_part_of_directives

Many Dart developers avoid using part entirely. They find it easier to reason about their code when each library is a single file. If you do choose to use part to split part of a library out into another file, Dart requires the other file to in turn indicate which library it's a part of.

Dart allows the part of directive to use the name of a library. Naming libraries is a legacy feature that is now discouraged. Library names can introduce ambiguity when determining which library a part belongs to.

The preferred syntax is to use a URI string that points directly to the library file. If you have some library, my_library.dart, that contains:

library my_library;

part 'some/other/file.dart';

Then the part file should use the library file's URI string:

part of '../../my_library.dart';

Not the library name:

part of my_library;

Linter rule: implementation_imports

The src directory under lib is specified to contain libraries private to the package's own implementation. The way package maintainers version their package takes this convention into account. They are free to make sweeping changes to code under src without it being a breaking change to the package.

That means that if you import some other package's private library, a minor, theoretically non-breaking point release of that package could break your code.

Linter rule: avoid_relative_lib_imports

A package: import lets you access a library inside a package's lib directory without having to worry about where the package is stored on your computer. For this to work, you cannot have imports that require the lib to be in some location on disk relative to other files. In other words, a relative import path in a file inside lib can't reach out and access a file outside of the lib directory, and a library outside of lib can't use a relative path to reach into the lib directory. Doing either leads to confusing errors and broken programs.

For example, say your directory structure looks like this:

my_package
└─ lib
   └─ api.dart
   test
   └─ api_test.dart

And say api_test.dart imports api.dart in two ways:

import 'package:my_package/api.dart';
import '../lib/api.dart';

Dart thinks those are imports of two completely unrelated libraries. To avoid confusing Dart and yourself, follow these two rules:

• Don't use /lib/ in import paths.
• Don't use ../ to escape the lib directory.

Instead, when you need to reach into a package's lib directory (even from the same package's test directory or any other top-level directory), use a package: import.

import 'package:my_package/api.dart';

A package should never reach out of its lib directory and import libraries from other places in the package.

Linter rule: prefer_relative_imports

Whenever the previous rule doesn't come into play, follow this one. When an import does not reach across lib, prefer using relative imports. They're shorter. For example, say your directory structure looks like this:

my_package
└─ lib
   ├─ src
   │  └─ stuff.dart
   │  └─ utils.dart
   └─ api.dart
   test
   │─ api_test.dart
   └─ test_utils.dart

Here is how the various libraries should import each other:

import 'src/stuff.dart';
import 'src/utils.dart';

import '../api.dart';
import 'stuff.dart';

import 'package:my_package/api.dart'; // Don't reach into 'lib'.

import 'test_utils.dart'; // Relative within 'test' is fine.

Linter rule: avoid_init_to_null

If a variable has a non-nullable type, Dart reports a compile error if you try to use it before it has been definitely initialized. If the variable is nullable, then it is implicitly initialized to null for you. There's no concept of "uninitialized memory" in Dart and no need to explicitly initialize a variable to null to be "safe".

Item? bestDeal(List<Item> cart) {
  Item? bestItem;

  for (final item in cart) {
    if (bestItem == null || item.price < bestItem.price) {
      bestItem = item;
    }
  }

  return bestItem;
}

Item? bestDeal(List<Item> cart) {
  Item? bestItem = null;

  for (final item in cart) {
    if (bestItem == null || item.price < bestItem.price) {
      bestItem = item;
    }
  }

  return bestItem;
}

Linter rule: avoid_init_to_null

If you make a nullable parameter optional but don't give it a default value, the language implicitly uses null as the default, so there's no need to write it.

void error([String? message]) {
  stderr.write(message ?? '\n');
}

void error([String? message = null]) {
  stderr.write(message ?? '\n');
}

Using the equality operator to evaluate a non-nullable boolean expression against a boolean literal is redundant. It's always simpler to eliminate the equality operator, and use the unary negation operator ! if necessary:

if (nonNullableBool) { ... }

if (!nonNullableBool) { ... }

if (nonNullableBool == true) { ... }

if (nonNullableBool == false) { ... }

To evaluate a boolean expression that is nullable, you should use ?? or an explicit != null check.

// If you want null to result in false:
if (nullableBool ?? false) { ... }

// If you want null to result in false
// and you want the variable to type promote:
if (nullableBool != null && nullableBool) { ... }

// Static error if null:
if (nullableBool) { ... }

// If you want null to be false:
if (nullableBool == true) { ... }

nullableBool == true is a viable expression, but shouldn't be used for several reasons:

• It doesn't indicate the code has anything to do with null.

• Because it's not evidently null related, it can easily be mistaken for the non-nullable case, where the equality operator is redundant and can be removed. That's only true when the boolean expression on the left has no chance of producing null, but not when it can.

• The boolean logic is confusing. If nullableBool is null, then nullableBool == true means the condition evaluates to false.

The ?? operator makes it clear that something to do with null is happening, so it won't be mistaken for a redundant operation. The logic is much clearer too; the result of the expression being null is the same as the boolean literal.

Using a null-aware operator such as ?? on a variable inside a condition doesn't promote the variable to a non-nullable type. If you want the variable to be promoted inside the body of the if statement, it's better to use an explicit != null check instead of ??.

Dart offers no way to tell if a late variable has been initialized or assigned to. If you access it, it either immediately runs the initializer (if it has one) or throws an exception. Sometimes you have some state that's lazily initialized where late might be a good fit, but you also need to be able to tell if the initialization has happened yet.

Although you could detect initialization by storing the state in a late variable and having a separate boolean field that tracks whether the variable has been set, that's redundant because Dart internally maintains the initialized status of the late variable. Instead, it's usually clearer to make the variable non-late and nullable. Then you can see if the variable has been initialized by checking for null.

Of course, if null is a valid initialized value for the variable, then it probably does make sense to have a separate boolean field.

Checking that a nullable variable is not equal to null promotes the variable to a non-nullable type. That lets you access members on the variable and pass it to functions expecting a non-nullable type.

Type promotion is only supported, however, for local variables, parameters, and private final fields. Values that are open to manipulation can't be type promoted.

Declaring members private and final, as we generally recommend, is often enough to bypass these limitations. But, that's not always an option.

One pattern to work around type promotion limitations is to use a null-check pattern. This simultaneously confirms the member's value is not null, and binds that value to a new non-nullable variable of the same base type.

class UploadException {
  final Response? response;

  UploadException([this.response]);

  @override
  String toString() {
    if (this.response case var response?) {
      return 'Could not complete upload to ${response.url} '
          '(error code ${response.errorCode}): ${response.reason}.';
    }
    return 'Could not upload (no response).';
  }
}

Another work around is to assign the field's value to a local variable. Null checks on that variable will promote, so you can safely treat it as non-nullable.

class UploadException {
  final Response? response;

  UploadException([this.response]);

  @override
  String toString() {
    final response = this.response;
    if (response != null) {
      return 'Could not complete upload to ${response.url} '
          '(error code ${response.errorCode}): ${response.reason}.';
    }
    return 'Could not upload (no response).';
  }
}

Be careful when using a local variable. If you need to write back to the field, make sure that you don't write back to the local variable instead. (Making the local variable final can prevent such mistakes.) Also, if the field might change while the local is still in scope, then the local might have a stale value.

Sometimes it's best to simply use ! on the field. In some cases, though, using either a local variable or a null-check pattern can be cleaner and safer than using ! every time you need to treat the value as non-null:

class UploadException {
  final Response? response;

  UploadException([this.response]);

  @override
  String toString() {
    if (response != null) {
      return 'Could not complete upload to ${response!.url} '
          '(error code ${response!.errorCode}): ${response!.reason}.';
    }

    return 'Could not upload (no response).';
  }
}

Here are some best practices to keep in mind when composing strings in Dart.

Linter rule: prefer_adjacent_string_concatenation

If you have two string literals—not values, but the actual quoted literal form—you do not need to use + to concatenate them. Just like in C and C++, simply placing them next to each other does it. This is a good way to make a single long string that doesn't fit on one line.

raiseAlarm('ERROR: Parts of the spaceship are on fire. Other '
    'parts are overrun by martians. Unclear which are which.');

raiseAlarm('ERROR: Parts of the spaceship are on fire. Other ' +
    'parts are overrun by martians. Unclear which are which.');

Linter rule: prefer_interpolation_to_compose_strings

If you're coming from other languages, you're used to using long chains of + to build a string out of literals and other values. That does work in Dart, but it's almost always cleaner and shorter to use interpolation:

'Hello, $name! You are ${year - birth} years old.';

'Hello, ' + name + '! You are ' + (year - birth).toString() + ' y...';

Note that this guideline applies to combining multiple literals and values. It's fine to use .toString() when converting only a single object to a string.

Linter rule: unnecessary_brace_in_string_interps

If you're interpolating a simple identifier not immediately followed by more alphanumeric text, the {} should be omitted.

var greeting = 'Hi, $name! I love your ${decade}s costume.';

var greeting = 'Hi, ${name}! I love your ${decade}s costume.';

Out of the box, Dart supports four collection types: lists, maps, queues, and sets. The following best practices apply to collections.

Linter rule: prefer_collection_literals

Dart has three core collection types: List, Map, and Set. The Map and Set classes have unnamed constructors like most classes do. But because these collections are used so frequently, Dart has nicer built-in syntax for creating them:

var points = <Point>[];
var addresses = <String, Address>{};
var counts = <int>{};

var addresses = Map<String, Address>();
var counts = Set<int>();

Note that this guideline doesn't apply to the named constructors for those classes. List.from(), Map.fromIterable(), and friends all have their uses. (The List class also has an unnamed constructor, but it is prohibited in null safe Dart.)

Collection literals are particularly powerful in Dart because they give you access to the spread operator for including the contents of other collections, and if and for for performing control flow while building the contents:

var arguments = [
  ...options,
  command,
  ...?modeFlags,
  for (var path in filePaths)
    if (path.endsWith('.dart')) path.replaceAll('.dart', '.js')
];

var arguments = <String>[];
arguments.addAll(options);
arguments.add(command);
if (modeFlags != null) arguments.addAll(modeFlags);
arguments.addAll(filePaths
    .where((path) => path.endsWith('.dart'))
    .map((path) => path.replaceAll('.dart', '.js')));

Linter rules: prefer_is_empty, prefer_is_not_empty

The Iterable contract does not require that a collection know its length or be able to provide it in constant time. Calling .length just to see if the collection contains anything can be painfully slow.

Instead, there are faster and more readable getters: .isEmpty and .isNotEmpty. Use the one that doesn't require you to negate the result.

if (lunchBox.isEmpty) return 'so hungry...';
if (words.isNotEmpty) return words.join(' ');

if (lunchBox.length == 0) return 'so hungry...';
if (!words.isEmpty) return words.join(' ');

Linter rule: avoid_function_literals_in_foreach_calls

forEach() functions are widely used in JavaScript because the built in for-in loop doesn't do what you usually want. In Dart, if you want to iterate over a sequence, the idiomatic way to do that is using a loop.

for (final person in people) {
  ...
}

people.forEach((person) {
  ...
});

Note that this guideline specifically says "function literal". If you want to invoke some already existing function on each element, forEach() is fine.

people.forEach(print);

Also note that it's always OK to use Map.forEach(). Maps aren't iterable, so this guideline doesn't apply.

Given an Iterable, there are two obvious ways to produce a new List that contains the same elements:

var copy1 = iterable.toList();
var copy2 = List.from(iterable);

The obvious difference is that the first one is shorter. The important difference is that the first one preserves the type argument of the original object:

// Creates a List<int>:
var iterable = [1, 2, 3];

// Prints "List<int>":
print(iterable.toList().runtimeType);

// Creates a List<int>:
var iterable = [1, 2, 3];

// Prints "List<dynamic>":
print(List.from(iterable).runtimeType);

If you want to change the type, then calling List.from() is useful:

var numbers = [1, 2.3, 4]; // List<num>.
numbers.removeAt(1); // Now it only contains integers.
var ints = List<int>.from(numbers);

But if your goal is just to copy the iterable and preserve its original type, or you don't care about the type, then use toList().

Linter rule: prefer_iterable_whereType

Let's say you have a list containing a mixture of objects, and you want to get just the integers out of it. You could use where() like this:

var objects = [1, 'a', 2, 'b', 3];
var ints = objects.where((e) => e is int);

This is verbose, but, worse, it returns an iterable whose type probably isn't what you want. In the example here, it returns an Iterable<Object> even though you likely want an Iterable<int> since that's the type you're filtering it to.

Sometimes you see code that "corrects" the above error by adding cast():

var objects = [1, 'a', 2, 'b', 3];
var ints = objects.where((e) => e is int).cast<int>();

That's verbose and causes two wrappers to be created, with two layers of indirection and redundant runtime checking. Fortunately, the core library has the whereType() method for this exact use case:

var objects = [1, 'a', 2, 'b', 3];
var ints = objects.whereType<int>();

Using whereType() is concise, produces an Iterable of the desired type, and has no unnecessary levels of wrapping.

Often when you're dealing with an iterable or stream, you perform several transformations on it. At the end, you want to produce an object with a certain type argument. Instead of tacking on a call to cast(), see if one of the existing transformations can change the type.

If you're already calling toList(), replace that with a call to List<T>.from() where T is the type of resulting list you want.

var stuff = <dynamic>[1, 2];
var ints = List<int>.from(stuff);

var stuff = <dynamic>[1, 2];
var ints = stuff.toList().cast<int>();

If you are calling map(), give it an explicit type argument so that it produces an iterable of the desired type. Type inference often picks the correct type for you based on the function you pass to map(), but sometimes you need to be explicit.

var stuff = <dynamic>[1, 2];
var reciprocals = stuff.map<double>((n) => 1 / n);

var stuff = <dynamic>[1, 2];
var reciprocals = stuff.map((n) => 1 / n).cast<double>();

This is the softer generalization of the previous rule. Sometimes there is no nearby operation you can use to fix the type of some object. Even then, when possible avoid using cast() to "change" a collection's type.

Prefer any of these options instead:

• Create it with the right type. Change the code where the collection is first created so that it has the right type.

• Cast the elements on access. If you immediately iterate over the collection, cast each element inside the iteration.

• Eagerly cast using List.from(). If you'll eventually access most of the elements in the collection, and you don't need the object to be backed by the original live object, convert it using List.from().

  The cast() method returns a lazy collection that checks the element type on every operation. If you perform only a few operations on only a few elements, that laziness can be good. But in many cases, the overhead of lazy validation and of wrapping outweighs the benefits.

Here is an example of creating it with the right type:

List<int> singletonList(int value) {
  var list = <int>[];
  list.add(value);
  return list;
}

List<int> singletonList(int value) {
  var list = []; // List<dynamic>.
  list.add(value);
  return list.cast<int>();
}

Here is casting each element on access:

void printEvens(List<Object> objects) {
  // We happen to know the list only contains ints.
  for (final n in objects) {
    if ((n as int).isEven) print(n);
  }
}

void printEvens(List<Object> objects) {
  // We happen to know the list only contains ints.
  for (final n in objects.cast<int>()) {
    if (n.isEven) print(n);
  }
}

Here is casting eagerly using List.from():

int median(List<Object> objects) {
  // We happen to know the list only contains ints.
  var ints = List<int>.from(objects);
  ints.sort();
  return ints[ints.length ~/ 2];
}

int median(List<Object> objects) {
  // We happen to know the list only contains ints.
  var ints = objects.cast<int>();
  ints.sort();
  return ints[ints.length ~/ 2];
}

These alternatives don't always work, of course, and sometimes cast() is the right answer. But consider that method a little risky and undesirable—it can be slow and may fail at runtime if you aren't careful.

In Dart, even functions are objects. Here are some best practices involving functions.

Linter rule: prefer_function_declarations_over_variables

Modern languages have realized how useful local nested functions and closures are. It's common to have a function defined inside another one. In many cases, this function is used as a callback immediately and doesn't need a name. A function expression is great for that.

But, if you do need to give it a name, use a function declaration statement instead of binding a lambda to a variable.

void main() {
  void localFunction() {
    ...
  }
}

void main() {
  var localFunction = () {
    ...
  };
}

Linter rule: unnecessary_lambdas

When you refer to a function, method, or named constructor without parentheses, Dart creates a tear-off. This is a closure that takes the same parameters as the function and invokes the underlying function when you call it. If your code needs a closure that invokes a named function with the same parameters as the closure accepts, don't wrap the call in a lambda. Use a tear-off.

var charCodes = [68, 97, 114, 116];
var buffer = StringBuffer();

// Function:
charCodes.forEach(print);

// Method:
charCodes.forEach(buffer.write);

// Named constructor:
var strings = charCodes.map(String.fromCharCode);

// Unnamed constructor:
var buffers = charCodes.map(StringBuffer.new);

var charCodes = [68, 97, 114, 116];
var buffer = StringBuffer();

// Function:
charCodes.forEach((code) {
  print(code);
});

// Method:
charCodes.forEach((code) {
  buffer.write(code);
});

// Named constructor:
var strings = charCodes.map((code) => String.fromCharCode(code));

// Unnamed constructor:
var buffers = charCodes.map((code) => StringBuffer(code));

The following best practices describe how to best use variables in Dart.

Most local variables shouldn't have type annotations and should be declared using just var or final. There are two rules in wide use for when to use one or the other:

• Use final for local variables that are not reassigned and var for those that are.

• Use var for all local variables, even ones that aren't reassigned. Never use final for locals. (Using final for fields and top-level variables is still encouraged, of course.)

Either rule is acceptable, but pick one and apply it consistently throughout your code. That way when a reader sees var, they know whether it means that the variable is assigned later in the function.

When designing a class, you often want to expose multiple views into the same underlying state. Often you see code that calculates all of those views in the constructor and then stores them:

class Circle {
  double radius;
  double area;
  double circumference;

  Circle(double radius)
      : radius = radius,
        area = pi * radius * radius,
        circumference = pi * 2.0 * radius;
}

This code has two things wrong with it. First, it's likely wasting memory. The area and circumference, strictly speaking, are caches. They are stored calculations that we could recalculate from other data we already have. They are trading increased memory for reduced CPU usage. Do we know we have a performance problem that merits that trade-off?

Worse, the code is wrong. The problem with caches is invalidation—how do you know when the cache is out of date and needs to be recalculated? Here, we never do, even though radius is mutable. You can assign a different value and the area and circumference will retain their previous, now incorrect values.

To correctly handle cache invalidation, we would need to do this:

class Circle {
  double _radius;
  double get radius => _radius;
  set radius(double value) {
    _radius = value;
    _recalculate();
  }

  double _area = 0.0;
  double get area => _area;

  double _circumference = 0.0;
  double get circumference => _circumference;

  Circle(this._radius) {
    _recalculate();
  }

  void _recalculate() {
    _area = pi * _radius * _radius;
    _circumference = pi * 2.0 * _radius;
  }
}

That's an awful lot of code to write, maintain, debug, and read. Instead, your first implementation should be:

class Circle {
  double radius;

  Circle(this.radius);

  double get area => pi * radius * radius;
  double get circumference => pi * 2.0 * radius;
}

This code is shorter, uses less memory, and is less error-prone. It stores the minimal amount of data needed to represent the circle. There are no fields to get out of sync because there is only a single source of truth.

In some cases, you may need to cache the result of a slow calculation, but only do that after you know you have a performance problem, do it carefully, and leave a comment explaining the optimization.

In Dart, objects have members which can be functions (methods) or data (instance variables). The following best practices apply to an object's members.

Linter rule: unnecessary_getters_setters

In Java and C#, it's common to hide all fields behind getters and setters (or properties in C#), even if the implementation just forwards to the field. That way, if you ever need to do more work in those members, you can without needing to touch the call sites. This is because calling a getter method is different than accessing a field in Java, and accessing a property isn't binary-compatible with accessing a raw field in C#.

Dart doesn't have this limitation. Fields and getters/setters are completely indistinguishable. You can expose a field in a class and later wrap it in a getter and setter without having to touch any code that uses that field.

class Box {
  Object? contents;
}

class Box {
  Object? _contents;
  Object? get contents => _contents;
  set contents(Object? value) {
    _contents = value;
  }
}

If you have a field that outside code should be able to see but not assign to, a simple solution that works in many cases is to simply mark it final.

class Box {
  final contents = [];
}

class Box {
  Object? _contents;
  Object? get contents => _contents;
}

Of course, if you need to internally assign to the field outside of the constructor, you may need to do the "private field, public getter" pattern, but don't reach for that until you need to.

Linter rule: prefer_expression_function_bodies

In addition to using => for function expressions, Dart also lets you define members with it. That style is a good fit for simple members that just calculate and return a value.

double get area => (right - left) * (bottom - top);

String capitalize(String name) =>
    '${name[0].toUpperCase()}${name.substring(1)}';

People writing code seem to love =>, but it's very easy to abuse it and end up with code that's hard to read. If your declaration is more than a couple of lines or contains deeply nested expressions—cascades and conditional operators are common offenders—do yourself and everyone who has to read your code a favor and use a block body and some statements.

Treasure? openChest(Chest chest, Point where) {
  if (_opened.containsKey(chest)) return null;

  var treasure = Treasure(where);
  treasure.addAll(chest.contents);
  _opened[chest] = treasure;
  return treasure;
}

Treasure? openChest(Chest chest, Point where) => _opened.containsKey(chest)
    ? null
    : _opened[chest] = (Treasure(where)..addAll(chest.contents));

You can also use => on members that don't return a value. This is idiomatic when a setter is small and has a corresponding getter that uses =>.

num get x => center.x;
set x(num value) => center = Point(value, center.y);

Linter rule: unnecessary_this

JavaScript requires an explicit this. to refer to members on the object whose method is currently being executed, but Dart—like C++, Java, and C#—doesn't have that limitation.

There are only two times you need to use this.. One is when a local variable with the same name shadows the member you want to access:

class Box {
  Object? value;

  void clear() {
    this.update(null);
  }

  void update(Object? value) {
    this.value = value;
  }
}

class Box {
  Object? value;

  void clear() {
    update(null);
  }

  void update(Object? value) {
    this.value = value;
  }
}

The other time to use this. is when redirecting to a named constructor:

class ShadeOfGray {
  final int brightness;

  ShadeOfGray(int val) : brightness = val;

  ShadeOfGray.black() : this(0);

  // This won't parse or compile!
  // ShadeOfGray.alsoBlack() : black();
}

class ShadeOfGray {
  final int brightness;

  ShadeOfGray(int val) : brightness = val;

  ShadeOfGray.black() : this(0);

  // But now it will!
  ShadeOfGray.alsoBlack() : this.black();
}

Note that constructor parameters never shadow fields in constructor initializer lists:

class Box extends BaseBox {
  Object? value;

  Box(Object? value)
      : value = value,
        super(value);
}

This looks surprising, but works like you want. Fortunately, code like this is relatively rare thanks to initializing formals and super initializers.

If a field doesn't depend on any constructor parameters, it can and should be initialized at its declaration. It takes less code and avoids duplication when the class has multiple constructors.

class ProfileMark {
  final String name;
  final DateTime start;

  ProfileMark(this.name) : start = DateTime.now();
  ProfileMark.unnamed()
      : name = '',
        start = DateTime.now();
}

class ProfileMark {
  final String name;
  final DateTime start = DateTime.now();

  ProfileMark(this.name);
  ProfileMark.unnamed() : name = '';
}

Some fields can't be initialized at their declarations because they need to reference this—to use other fields or call methods, for example. However, if the field is marked late, then the initializer can access this.

Of course, if a field depends on constructor parameters, or is initialized differently by different constructors, then this guideline does not apply.

The following best practices apply to declaring constructors for a class.

Linter rule: prefer_initializing_formals

Many fields are initialized directly from a constructor parameter, like:

class Point {
  double x, y;
  Point(double x, double y)
      : x = x,
        y = y;
}

We've got to type x four times here to define a field. We can do better:

class Point {
  double x, y;
  Point(this.x, this.y);
}

This this. syntax before a constructor parameter is called an "initializing formal". You can't always take advantage of it. Sometimes you want to have a named parameter whose name doesn't match the name of the field you are initializing. But when you can use initializing formals, you should.

Dart requires you to initialize non-nullable fields before they can be read. Since fields can be read inside the constructor body, this means you get an error if you don't initialize a non-nullable field before the body runs.

You can make this error go away by marking the field late. That turns the compile-time error into a runtime error if you access the field before it is initialized. That's what you need in some cases, but often the right fix is to initialize the field in the constructor initializer list:

class Point {
  double x, y;
  Point.polar(double theta, double radius)
      : x = cos(theta) * radius,
        y = sin(theta) * radius;
}

class Point {
  late double x, y;
  Point.polar(double theta, double radius) {
    x = cos(theta) * radius;
    y = sin(theta) * radius;
  }
}

The initializer list gives you access to constructor parameters and lets you initialize fields before they can be read. So, if it's possible to use an initializer list, that's better than making the field late and losing some static safety and performance.

Linter rule: empty_constructor_bodies

In Dart, a constructor with an empty body can be terminated with just a semicolon. (In fact, it's required for const constructors.)

class Point {
  double x, y;
  Point(this.x, this.y);
}

class Point {
  double x, y;
  Point(this.x, this.y) {}
}

Linter rule: unnecessary_new

The new keyword is optional when calling a constructor. Its meaning is not clear because factory constructors mean a new invocation may not actually return a new object.

The language still permits new, but consider it deprecated and avoid using it in your code.

Widget build(BuildContext context) {
  return Row(
    children: [
      RaisedButton(
        child: Text('Increment'),
      ),
      Text('Click!'),
    ],
  );
}

Widget build(BuildContext context) {
  return new Row(
    children: [
      new RaisedButton(
        child: new Text('Increment'),
      ),
      new Text('Click!'),
    ],
  );
}

Linter rule: unnecessary_const

In contexts where an expression must be constant, the const keyword is implicit, doesn't need to be written, and shouldn't. Those contexts are any expression inside:

• A const collection literal.
• A const constructor call
• A metadata annotation.
• The initializer for a const variable declaration.
• A switch case expression—the part right after case before the :, not the body of the case.

(Default values are not included in this list because future versions of Dart may support non-const default values.)

Basically, any place where it would be an error to write new instead of const, Dart allows you to omit the const.

const primaryColors = [
  Color('red', [255, 0, 0]),
  Color('green', [0, 255, 0]),
  Color('blue', [0, 0, 255]),
];

const primaryColors = const [
  const Color('red', const [255, 0, 0]),
  const Color('green', const [0, 255, 0]),
  const Color('blue', const [0, 0, 255]),
];

Dart uses exceptions when an error occurs in your program. The following best practices apply to catching and throwing exceptions.

Linter rule: avoid_catches_without_on_clauses

A catch clause with no on qualifier catches anything thrown by the code in the try block. Pokémon exception handling is very likely not what you want. Does your code correctly handle StackOverflowError or OutOfMemoryError? If you incorrectly pass the wrong argument to a method in that try block do you want to have your debugger point you to the mistake or would you rather that helpful ArgumentError get swallowed? Do you want any assert() statements inside that code to effectively vanish since you're catching the thrown AssertionErrors?

The answer is probably "no", in which case you should filter the types you catch. In most cases, you should have an on clause that limits you to the kinds of runtime failures you are aware of and are correctly handling.

In rare cases, you may wish to catch any runtime error. This is usually in framework or low-level code that tries to insulate arbitrary application code from causing problems. Even here, it is usually better to catch Exception than to catch all types. Exception is the base class for all runtime errors and excludes errors that indicate programmatic bugs in the code.

If you really do feel you need to catch everything that can be thrown from a region of code, do something with what you catch. Log it, display it to the user or rethrow it, but do not silently discard it.

The Error class is the base class for programmatic errors. When an object of that type or one of its subinterfaces like ArgumentError is thrown, it means there is a bug in your code. When your API wants to report to a caller that it is being used incorrectly throwing an Error sends that signal clearly.

Conversely, if the exception is some kind of runtime failure that doesn't indicate a bug in the code, then throwing an Error is misleading. Instead, throw one of the core Exception classes or some other type.

Linter rule: avoid_catching_errors

This follows from the above. Since an Error indicates a bug in your code, it should unwind the entire callstack, halt the program, and print a stack trace so you can locate and fix the bug.

Catching errors of these types breaks that process and masks the bug. Instead of adding error-handling code to deal with this exception after the fact, go back and fix the code that is causing it to be thrown in the first place.

Linter rule: use_rethrow_when_possible

If you decide to rethrow an exception, prefer using the rethrow statement instead of throwing the same exception object using throw. rethrow preserves the original stack trace of the exception. throw on the other hand resets the stack trace to the last thrown position.

try {
  somethingRisky();
} catch (e) {
  if (!canHandle(e)) throw e;
  handle(e);
}

try {
  somethingRisky();
} catch (e) {
  if (!canHandle(e)) rethrow;
  handle(e);
}

Dart has several language features to support asynchronous programming. The following best practices apply to asynchronous coding.

Asynchronous code is notoriously hard to read and debug, even when using a nice abstraction like futures. The async/await syntax improves readability and lets you use all of the Dart control flow structures within your async code.

Future<int> countActivePlayers(String teamName) async {
  try {
    var team = await downloadTeam(teamName);
    if (team == null) return 0;

    var players = await team.roster;
    return players.where((player) => player.isActive).length;
  } catch (e) {
    log.error(e);
    return 0;
  }
}

Future<int> countActivePlayers(String teamName) {
  return downloadTeam(teamName).then((team) {
    if (team == null) return Future.value(0);

    return team.roster.then((players) {
      return players.where((player) => player.isActive).length;
    });
  }).catchError((e) {
    log.error(e);
    return 0;
  });
}

It's easy to get in the habit of using async on any function that does anything related to asynchrony. But in some cases, it's extraneous. If you can omit the async without changing the behavior of the function, do so.

Future<int> fastestBranch(Future<int> left, Future<int> right) {
  return Future.any([left, right]);
}

Future<int> fastestBranch(Future<int> left, Future<int> right) async {
  return Future.any([left, right]);
}

Cases where async is useful include:

• You are using await. (This is the obvious one.)

• You are returning an error asynchronously. async and then throw is shorter than return Future.error(...).

• You are returning a value and you want it implicitly wrapped in a future. async is shorter than Future.value(...).

Future<void> usesAwait(Future<String> later) async {
  print(await later);
}

Future<void> asyncError() async {
  throw 'Error!';
}

Future<String> asyncValue() async => 'value';

This parallels the above suggestion on iterables. Streams support many of the same methods and also handle things like transmitting errors, closing, etc. correctly.

Many people new to asynchronous programming want to write code that produces a future. The constructors in Future don't seem to fit their need so they eventually find the Completer class and use that.

Future<bool> fileContainsBear(String path) {
  var completer = Completer<bool>();

  File(path).readAsString().then((contents) {
    completer.complete(contents.contains('bear'));
  });

  return completer.future;
}

Completer is needed for two kinds of low-level code: new asynchronous primitives, and interfacing with asynchronous code that doesn't use futures. Most other code should use async/await or Future.then(), because they're clearer and make error handling easier.

Future<bool> fileContainsBear(String path) {
  return File(path).readAsString().then((contents) {
    return contents.contains('bear');
  });
}

Future<bool> fileContainsBear(String path) async {
  var contents = await File(path).readAsString();
  return contents.contains('bear');
}

Before you can do anything useful with a FutureOr<T>, you typically need to do an is check to see if you have a Future<T> or a bare T. If the type argument is some specific type as in FutureOr<int>, it doesn't matter which test you use, is int or is Future<int>. Either works because those two types are disjoint.

However, if the value type is Object or a type parameter that could possibly be instantiated with Object, then the two branches overlap. Future<Object> itself implements Object, so is Object or is T where T is some type parameter that could be instantiated with Object returns true even when the object is a future. Instead, explicitly test for the Future case:

Future<T> logValue<T>(FutureOr<T> value) async {
  if (value is Future<T>) {
    var result = await value;
    print(result);
    return result;
  } else {
    print(value);
    return value;
  }
}

Future<T> logValue<T>(FutureOr<T> value) async {
  if (value is T) {
    print(value);
    return value;
  } else {
    var result = await value;
    print(result);
    return result;
  }
}

In the bad example, if you pass it a Future<Object>, it incorrectly treats it like a bare, synchronous value.

Unless stated otherwise, the documentation on this site reflects Dart 3.5.3. Page last updated on 2024-10-16. View source or report an issue.