I am writing a native plugin that, in some cases, has to call functions in the Flutter portion of the app, written in Dart.
How it's achieved, is explained here:
https://flutter.io/platform-channels/
Furthermore, an example of invoking a method from the native/platform part towards the Dart/non-native is here:
https://github.com/flutter/plugins/tree/master/packages/quick_actions
Now, this example is really nice in case the platform only needs to invoke a method, i.e. that call returns nothing/void, but in case it needs to invoke a function, i.e. needs a return value from the non-native/Dart part, I could not have found an example or documentation on the internet. I believe it can be implemented though, because in the native Java part, there is a method:
public void invokeMethod(String method, Object arguments, MethodChannel.Result callback)
So, there is a callback object that could have a return value from the non-native part - or, I am mistaken here, and there is currently no way of returning a value from the non-native Dart portion of the app?
The signature is void setMethodCallHandler(Future<dynamic> handler(MethodCall call)), so we need to provide a function at the Dart end that returns Future<dynamic>, for example _channel.setMethodCallHandler(myUtilsHandler);
Then implement the handler. This one handles two methods foo and bar returning respectively String and double.
Future<dynamic> myUtilsHandler(MethodCall methodCall) async {
switch (methodCall.method) {
case 'foo':
return 'some string';
case 'bar':
return 123.0;
default:
throw MissingPluginException('notImplemented');
}
}
At the Java end the return value is passed to the success method of the Result callback.
channel.invokeMethod("foo", arguments, new Result() {
#Override
public void success(Object o) {
// this will be called with o = "some string"
}
#Override
public void error(String s, String s1, Object o) {}
#Override
public void notImplemented() {}
});
In Swift, the return value is an Any? passed to the result closure. (Not implemented is signaled by the any parameter being the const NSObject value FlutterMethodNotImplemented.)
channel.invokeMethod("foo", arguments: args, result: {(r:Any?) -> () in
// this will be called with r = "some string" (or FlutterMethodNotImplemented)
})
Related
I am writing a native plugin that, in some cases, has to call functions in the Flutter portion of the app, written in Dart.
How it's achieved, is explained here:
https://flutter.io/platform-channels/
Furthermore, an example of invoking a method from the native/platform part towards the Dart/non-native is here:
https://github.com/flutter/plugins/tree/master/packages/quick_actions
Now, this example is really nice in case the platform only needs to invoke a method, i.e. that call returns nothing/void, but in case it needs to invoke a function, i.e. needs a return value from the non-native/Dart part, I could not have found an example or documentation on the internet. I believe it can be implemented though, because in the native Java part, there is a method:
public void invokeMethod(String method, Object arguments, MethodChannel.Result callback)
So, there is a callback object that could have a return value from the non-native part - or, I am mistaken here, and there is currently no way of returning a value from the non-native Dart portion of the app?
The signature is void setMethodCallHandler(Future<dynamic> handler(MethodCall call)), so we need to provide a function at the Dart end that returns Future<dynamic>, for example _channel.setMethodCallHandler(myUtilsHandler);
Then implement the handler. This one handles two methods foo and bar returning respectively String and double.
Future<dynamic> myUtilsHandler(MethodCall methodCall) async {
switch (methodCall.method) {
case 'foo':
return 'some string';
case 'bar':
return 123.0;
default:
throw MissingPluginException('notImplemented');
}
}
At the Java end the return value is passed to the success method of the Result callback.
channel.invokeMethod("foo", arguments, new Result() {
#Override
public void success(Object o) {
// this will be called with o = "some string"
}
#Override
public void error(String s, String s1, Object o) {}
#Override
public void notImplemented() {}
});
In Swift, the return value is an Any? passed to the result closure. (Not implemented is signaled by the any parameter being the const NSObject value FlutterMethodNotImplemented.)
channel.invokeMethod("foo", arguments: args, result: {(r:Any?) -> () in
// this will be called with r = "some string" (or FlutterMethodNotImplemented)
})
I'm using a lambda expression in my C# script in my Unity project to call a function with a parameter when a DOTween callback is called.
It simply looks like this: animation.OnComplete(() => DestroyOnCompleted(children));
It works just fine, but I am note sure why a lambda expression is used in this case. I know it has something to do with delegates, but other than that, I'm not too sure; and I would like to explain it to my exam, if I get asked about it.
Could anyone enlighten me? :-)
Why not? ;)
I don't know that API too much but it seems like it is simply expecting something like
OnComplete(TweenCallback callback)
where TweenCallback from your usage basically seems to equal the c# built-in Action delegate and basically simply a parameter less void
public delegate void TweenCallback();
so whether you pass in this callback as a lambda like
animation.OnComplete(() => DestroyOnCompleted(children));
or anonymous method using the delegate operator like
animation.OnComplete(delegate { DestroyOnCompleted(children); });
or using a method
animation.OnComplete(OnCompletedAnimation);
...
private void OnCompletedAnimation()
{
DestroyOnCompleted(children);
}
is basically equivalent.
The main difference between the first two and the last one is: Where does children come from?
The lambda and delegate way allows you to pass in children from the current scope variables without having to store it in any field!
If you look at the documentation of DotTween, you see that row:
Now looking at the Source Code of DotTween, you can see the definition of TweenCallback:
public delegate void TweenCallback();
So the question now is, what is a delegate void in c#?
A delegate in c# is basically an object that "represent" a function.
But functions are not all the same, they can have parameters in input and return something (or return void).
To understand what kind of function does a delegate represent, try to just remove the keyword delegate.
For example, the TweenCallback without the keyboard delegate is:
public void TweenCaalback()
So the delegate represent a void function that has no parameters in input! (And it is Public).
What does it means represent a function?
It means that this is valid code:
void DoNothing()
{
}
TweenCallback x = DoNothing;
x();
So you can "assign functions" to a delegate that has the same function signature.
In this case, TweenCallback is a delegate void (), so you can assign to it a void() function.
What is a lambda?
A lambda is an expression of that style:
(string name, int age) => { return 3 };
you can read that as "string name and int age go in return 3"
That's a more concise way to describe that function:
int AnonymousFunction (string name, int age) {}
The main difference is that lambdas do not have any name. If you have not any parameter in input the lambda become like this:
() => {return 3;}
If you have only one statement inside the {} you are allowed to write it more shortly as
() => 3;
Final step
Is this valid code?
void DoNothing()
{
}
TweenCallback x = () => DoNothing();
Yes it is! Tween callback is expects a void () function.
() => DoNothing(); Is a lambda (un-named function) that takes nothing in input and calls some other function. It's the shorter version of () => {DoNothing();} that you have to think as void () {DoNothing();}
So when writing
animation.OnComplete(() => DestroyOnCompleted(children));
You are just passing a void () function to OnComplete Method, that makes sense because TweenCallback is a void () delegate.
Notes
As you can see, functions and lambdas expression can be converted implicitly to delegates. But you have to understand that they are all different things, and in more advanced coding scenarios that distinction is not just pure theory.
For some reason the compiler is complaining about this:
SynchronousFuture<void> setNewRoutePath(AppLink newLink) {
_currentLink = newLink;
// return null; // compiler really wants to see this null return...why?
}
But is happy with this:
Future<void> setNewRoutePath(AppLink newLink) async {
_currentLink = newLink;
}
Seems like async keyword is handling the implicit return here. Is there some equivalent for SynchronousFuture?
SynchronousFuture<void> setNewRoutePath(AppLink newLink) {
_currentLink = newLink;
// return null; // compiler really wants to see this null return...why?
}
You need a return value because your function is declared to return a non-void value, so it must return something. You could argue that all functions could implicitly return null if there's no explicit return statement, but that would be error-prone:
int f(String someValue) {
if (someCondition) {
return 42;
}
} // f didn't return anything if someCondition is false. Accidental or intentional?
Futures themselves aren't really special. If you have a non-async function that returns a Future, you must still have an explicit return statement:
Future<void> f() {
print('Hello world!');
} // Error: f doesn't end with a return statement.
However, the async keyword does a few things:
Primarily it enables the use of the await keyword.
It automatically wraps returned values in a Future. This includes implicit return values from void functions.
SynchronousFuture is just an ordinary class provided by Flutter that implements the Future interface. It is not special. It's not part of the Dart language, so there is not going to be any keyword that does automatic return value wrapping like what the async keyword does.
Also note that you should not just sprinkle return null statements in your function that returns SynchronousFuture. With an async function, a return; statement (or exiting the function without an explicit return statement) ultimately returns a Future<void>() to the caller. Callers expect to be able to call methods (e.g. .then()) on the returned Future to add completion callbacks. If you return null for a SynchronousFuture, calling .then() on it will result in a null pointer exception at runtime. You instead would need to use return SynchronousFuture<void>(null);.
I also should point out that the SynchronousFuture documentation states:
In general use of this class should be avoided as it is very difficult to debug such bimodal behavior.
so unless you have some clear need to use a SynchronousFuture, you're better off avoiding it.
Unless you have created a class called SynchronousFuture the compiler will complain as there is no class called SynchronousFuture in the dart standard library, so either you or a library you import must define this class.
In dart all async functions must have a return value of type Future<T>.
// return null; // compiler really wants to see this null
return...why?
Because Future is not the same as void, when you return a value in an async function, that value is subsequently used as value for the future, as future is a generic class.
What is the difference between main() and void main() in Flutter
The only answers that I could find on the internet are about C++ or sth like that.
Well, let's see:
void main() {
print(main.runtimeType);
}
will print () => void. That means a function with no parameters returning void.
While
main() {
print(main.runtimeType);
}
will print () => dynamic. That means a function with no parameters returning dynamic.
The valid return type for the main function is void:
Every app must have a top-level main() function, which serves as the entrypoint to the app. The main() function returns void and has an optional List<String> parameter for arguments.
Source
So strictly speaking, having no return type (that means defaulting to the type dynamic) is wrong. But that is the simplified beginners instructions, so there are exceptions. But when in doubt, do it by the book.
the different is when return a value from the function in void read() you can't return any type of value ..
While in read()you can return any type of value weather is int , double , String , list and also a set Because it's dynamic also you can type dynamic read() it's same as read()
void main () {
// print(iifo.runtimeType);
var k = iifo() ;
print(k) ;
}
iifo ( ) {
return ('Stack') ;
}
output
Stack
in return line you can return any type of data (int , double , String , bool , list, etc....).
This answer does not address your question directly, since I see that it has been already answered properly. However, you might find good to know that the main function in a Dart application can also return Future<void> instead of void, since you can tag the main function as an async function.
In the particular case of a Flutter application, this means that you can do whatever you need to do before running runApp(...) in the main() method body, even asynchronously. This way, the splash screen will be shown until your asynchronous result is retrieved, before calling runApp(...). For example, setting a landing widget depending on the result of an asynchronous task:
Future<void> main() async {
// Do whatever you need to do here
final home = await createHomeWidgetDependingOnAsyncResult();
return runApp(MyApp(home: home));
}
I found it the problem, I wrote:
import 'LanguagesScreen.dart';
Instead of:
import 'package:flutter_projects/LanguagesScreen.dart';
One advantage of lambda expressions is that you have to evaluate a function only when you need its result.
In the following (simple) example, the text function is only evaluated when a writer is present:
public static void PrintLine(Func<string> text, TextWriter writer)
{
if (writer != null)
{
writer.WriteLine(text());
}
}
Unfortunately, this makes using the code a little bit ugly. You cannot call it with a constant or variable like
PrintLine("Some text", Console.Out);
and have to call it this way:
PrintLine(() => "Some text", Console.Out);
The compiler is not able to "infer" a parameterless function from the passed constant. Are there any plans to improve this in future versions of C# or am I missing something?
UPDATE:
I just found a dirty hack myself:
public class F<T>
{
private readonly T value;
private readonly Func<T> func;
public F(T value) { this.value = value; }
public F(Func<T> func) {this.func = func; }
public static implicit operator F<T>(T value)
{
return new F<T>(value);
}
public static implicit operator F<T>(Func<T> func)
{
return new F<T>(func);
}
public T Eval()
{
return this.func != null ? this.func() : this.value;
}
}
Now i can just define the function as:
public static void PrintLine(F<string> text, TextWriter writer)
{
if (writer != null)
{
writer.WriteLine(text.Eval());
}
}
and call it both with a function or a value.
I doubt that C# will get this feature, but D has it. What you've outlined is a suitable way to implement lazy argument evaluation in C#, and probably compiles very similarly to lazy in D, and in more pure functional languages.
All things considered, the four extra characters, plus optional white space, are not an exceptionally large price to pay for clear overload resolution and expressiveness in what is becoming a multi-paradigm strong-typed language.
The compiler is very good at inferring types, it is not good at inferring intent. One of the tricky things about all the new syntactic sugar in C# 3 is that they can lead to confusion as to what exactly the compiler does with them.
Consider your example:
() => "SomeText"
The compiler sees this and understands that you intend to create an anonymous function that takes no parameters and returns a type of System.String. This is all inferred from the lambda expression you gave it. In reality your lambda gets compiled to this:
delegate {
return "SomeText";
};
and it is a delegate to this anonymous function that you are sending to PrintLine for execution.
It has always been important in the past but now with LINQ, lambdas, iterator blocks, automatically implemented properties, among other things it is of the utmost importance to use a tool like .NET Reflector to take a look at your code after it is compiled to see what really makes those features work.
Unfortunately, the ugly syntax is all you have in C#.
The "dirty hack" from the update does not work, because it does not delay the evaluation of string parameters: they get evaluated before being passed to operator F<T>(T value).
Compare PrintLine(() => string.Join(", ", names), myWriter) to PrintLine(string.Join(", ", names), myWriter) In the first case, the strings are joined only if they are printed; in the second case, the strings are joined no matter what: only the printing is conditional. In other words, the evaluation is not lazy at all.
Well those two statements are completely different. One is defining a function, while the other is a statement. Confusing the syntax would be much trickier.
() => "SomeText" //this is a function
"SomeText" //this is a string
You could use an overload:-
public static void PrintLine(string text, TextWriter writer)
{
PrintLine(() => text, writer);
}
You could write an extension method on String to glue it in. You should be able to write "Some text".PrintLine(Console.Out); and have it do the work for you.
Oddly enough, I did some playing with lazy evaluation of lambda expressions a few weeks back and blogged about it here.
To be honest I don't fully understand your problem, but your solutions seems a tad complicated to me.
I think a problem I solved using lambda call is similar, maybe you could use it as inspiration: I want to see if a key exists in a dictionary, if not, I would need to execute a (costly) load operation.
public static class DictionaryHelper
{
public static TValue GetValueOrLambdaDefault<TKey, TValue> (this IDictionary<TKey, TValue> dictionary, TKey key, Func<TValue> func)
{
if (dictionary.ContainsKey(key))
return dictionary[key];
else
return func.Invoke();
}
}
[TestClass]
public class DictionaryHelperTest
{
[TestMethod]
public void GetValueOrLambdaDefaultTest()
{
var dict = new Dictionary<int, string>();
try
{
var res1 = dict.GetValueOrLambdaDefault(1, () => LoadObject());
Assert.Fail("Exception should be thrown");
}
catch { /*Exception should be thrown*/ }
dict.Add(1, "");
try
{
var res1 = dict.GetValueOrLambdaDefault(1, () => LoadObject());
}
catch { Assert.Fail("Exception should not be thrown"); }
}
public static string LoadObject()
{
throw new Exception();
}
}