I'm trying to learn Riverpod with clean architecture.
I have following set/chain of providers:
final databaseFutureProvider = FutureProvider<Database>((ref) async {
final db = await DatabaseHelper().createDatabase(); // this is async because 'openDatabase' of sqflite is async
return db;
});
final toDoDatasourceProvider = Provider<ToDoDatasource>((ref) {
final db = ref.watch(databaseFutureProvider); // problem is here!!
return ToDoDatasourceImpl(db: db);
});
final toDoRepositoryProvider = Provider<ToDoRepository>((ref) {
final ds = ref.watch(toDoDatasourceProvider);
return ToDoRepositoryImpl(ds);
});
I am probably missing some small things or doing it completely wrong. How to properly provide DB (that is async in its nature)?
You don't need multiple providers, in your case since you would need ToDoRepository always you can just Initialized before running the app and use it later without worrying about the database connection state
Future<void> main(List<String> args) async {
// Initialization the db
final db = await DatabaseHelper().createDatabase();
ProviderScope(
overrides: [
// pass the db
toDoRepositoryProvider.overrideWithValue(db),
],
child: RootApp(),
);
}
final toDoRepositoryProvider = Provider<ToDoRepository>((ref) {
throw UnimplementedError();
});
I totally agree with Mohammed Alfateh's decision. In addition, you can use ProviderContainer()..read(toDoDatasourceProvider) and UncontrolledProviderScope, to asynchronously assign values in main method. And in ToDoDatasourceImpl call the async method init() to assign a value in the field late final db.
Related
I have a piece of code trying to initialize the fields with data from two different users in the firebase realtime database, I tried various ways but all of them don't work and the field is not initialized error keeps popping up.
Here is the code:
class _PartnerProfilePageState extends State<PartnerProfilePage> {
final userUID = FirebaseAuth.instance.currentUser!.uid;
final database = FirebaseDatabase.instance.ref();
late final partnerUID;
late final profilePath;
late final partnerName;
late final birthday;
late final en;
#override
initState() {
super.initState();
initInfo();
}
initInfo() async {
database.child(userUID).onValue.listen((event) {
final data = Map<dynamic, dynamic>.from(event.snapshot.value as Map);
setState(() {
partnerUID = data['partner'];
en = data['language'].toString().startsWith('en');
initPartnerInfo();
});
});
}
Future initPartnerInfo() async {
final ppsnapshot =
await database.child(partnerUID).child('profilePath').get();
profilePath = ppsnapshot.value.toString();
final nsnapshot = await database.child(partnerUID).child('username').get();
partnerName = nsnapshot.value.toString();
final bsnapshot = await database.child(partnerUID).child('birtday').get();
birthday = bsnapshot.value.toString();
}
//rest of other unrelated stuff like build down there
}
(My firebase realtime database has no 'user' branch but directly save every user in the root with their userid).
I think there is a problem with the async initializing. The build method can try to build before you initialize the last variable(Because initState method can not async). You can easily check my theory.Delete the 'method call'(the initInfo) inside the initState(). Just create a button in the screen, give it a anonymous async function, inside the function call your init method and try to call your variables like this:
() async{
await initInfo();
print('partnerUID');
}
Easy way to checking out initialization process. Hope it helps.
I have a class that is responsible for all my API/Database queries. All the calls as well as the initialization of the class are async methods.
The contract I'd like to offer is that the caller has to call [initialize] as early as possible, but they don't have to await for it, and then they can call any of the API methods whenever they need later.
What I have looks roughly like this:
class MyApi {
late final ApiConnection _connection;
late final Future<void> _initialized;
void initialize(...) async {
_initialized = Future<void>(() async {
// expensive initialization that sets _connection
});
await _initialized;
}
Future<bool> someQuery(...) async {
await _initialized;
// expensive async query that uses _connection
}
Future<int> someOtherQuery(...) async {
await _initialized;
// expensive async query that uses _connection
}
}
This satisfies the nice contract I want for the caller, but in the implementation having those repeated await _initialized; lines at the start of every method feel very boilerplate-y. Is there a more elegant way to achieve the same result?
Short of using code-generation, I don't think there's a good way to automatically add boilerplate to all of your methods.
However, depending on how _connection is initialized, you perhaps instead could change:
late final ApiConnection _connection;
late final Future<void> _initialized;
to something like:
late final Future<ApiConnection> _connection = _initializeConnection(...);
and get rid of the _initialized flag. That way, your boilerplate would change from:
Future<bool> someQuery(...) async {
await _initialized;
// expensive async query that uses `_connection`
to:
Future<bool> someQuery(...) async {
var connection = await _connection;
// expensive async query that uses `connection`
This might not look like much of an improvement, but it is significantly less error-prone. With your current approach of using await _initialized;, any method that accidentally omits that could fail at runtime with a LateInitializationError when accessing _connection prematurely. Such a failure also could easily go unnoticed since the failure would depend on the order in which your methods are called. For example, if you had:
Future<bool> goodQuery() async {
await _initialized;
return _connection.doSomething();
}
Future<bool> badQuery() async {
// Oops, forgot `await _initialized;`.
return _connection.doSomething();
}
then calling
var result1 = await goodQuery();
var result2 = await badQuery();
would succeed, but
var result2 = await badQuery();
var result1 = await goodQuery();
would fail.
In contrast, if you can use var connection = await _connection; instead, then callers would be naturally forced to include that boilerplate. Any caller that accidentally omits the boilerplate and attempts to use _connection directly would fail at compilation time by trying to use a Future<ApiConnection> as an ApiConnection.
I have a StateNotifierProvider that depends on a FutureProvider. Currently they look like below.
final catalogProvider = StateNotifierProvider<CatalogNotifier, CatalogState>((ref) {
final network = ref.watch(networkProvider.future); // future provider
return CatalogNotifier(network: network);
});
this makes my CatalogNotifier accept a Future<NetworkProvider> instead of NetworkProvider and requires me to do things like below.
await (await network).doGet(...)
What's the best way to avoid having to await multiple and allow CatalogNotifier to accept a bare NetworkProvider so I can write like await network.doGet(...) ?
for completeness as requested, below is the other related providers
final networkProvider = FutureProvider<Network>((ref) async {
final cache = await ref.watch(cacheProvider.future);
return Network(cacheManager: cache);
});
final cacheProvider = FutureProvider<CacheManager>((ref) async {
final info = await ref.watch(packageInfoProvider.future);
final key = 'cache-${info.buildNumber}';
return CacheManager(Config(
key,
stalePeriod: const Duration(days: 30),
maxNrOfCacheObjects: 100,
));
I'm sure I can take my cache provider as a future into the network provider, so it doesn't have to be a FutureProvider, but I'm interested in how to solve the issue above, since in another scenario, if I depend on say 3 or 4 FutureProviders, this may not be an option.
this makes my CatalogNotifier accept a Future instead of >NetworkProvider and requires me to do things like below.
I can't think of a way to get your desired result.
Could you not just accept an AsyncValue and handle it in the statenotifier?
final catalogProvider = StateNotifierProvider<CatalogNotifier, CatalogState>((ref) {
final network = ref.watch(networkProvider); // future provider
return CatalogNotifier(network: network);
});
Then you can:
void someFunction() async {
network.maybeWhen(
data: (network) => AsyncData(await network.doGet(...)),
orElse: () => state = AsyncLoading(),
);
}
with riverpod v2 and its codegen features this has become much easier since you no longer have to decide the type of the provider. (unless you want to)
StateNotifier in riverpod 2
#riverpod
Future<CatalogController> catalog(CatalogRef ref) async {
final network = await ref.watch(networkProvider.future);
return CatalogController(network: network);
}
Alternative approch in Riverpod 2
Quite often you want to have a value calculated and have a way to explicitely redo that calculation from UI. Like a list from network, but with a refresh button in UI. This can be modelled as below in riverpod 2.
#riverpod
Future<CatalogState> myFeed(MyFeedRef ref) async {
final json = await loadData('url');
return CatalogState(json);
}
// and when you want to refresh this from your UI, or from another provider
ref.invalidate(myFeedProvider);
// if you want to also get the new value in that location right after refreshing
final newValue = await ref.refresh(myFeedProvider);
Riverpod 2 also has loading and error properties for the providers. You can use these to show the UI accordingly. Though if you want to show the last result from the provider while your feed is loading or in an error state, you have to model this yourself with a provider that returns a stream/BehaviorSubject, caches the last value .etc.
you can make AsyncValue a subtype of StateNotifier, I use the Todo list as an example.
as follows:
class TodoNotifier extends StateNotifier<AsyncValue<List<Todo>>> {
TodoNotifier(this._ref) : super(const AsyncValue.loading()) {
_fetchData();
}
final Ref _ref;
Future<void> _fetchData() async {
state = const AsyncValue.loading();
// todoListProvider is of type FutureProvider
_ref.read(todoListProvider).when(data: (data) {
state = AsyncValue.data(data);
}, error: (err, stackTrace) {
state = AsyncValue.error(err, stackTrace: stackTrace);
}, loading: () {
state = const AsyncValue.loading();
});
}
void addTodo(Todo todo) {
if (state.hasValue) {
final todoList = state.value ?? [];
state = AsyncValue.data(List.from(todoList)..add(todo));
}
}
....
}
I know it sounds simple and I went through the example given in the documentation. Yet somehow I am unable to get it right.
This is what I have:
void main() async {
await Hive.initFlutter();
//Hive.openBox('workoutBox');
runApp(const MyApp());
}
...
Next Screen:
var box;
...
Trying to add to the box
Future<void> _save() async{
// save doc id somewhere
final Id = doc.id;
//box = await Hive.openBox('workoutBox');
box.put("Id", Id);
}
Trying to retrieve in another function:
var someId = box.get("Id");
Current error: get was called on null
My confusion is, where/how do you declare, open and retrieve from the box in this situation?
It seems you are forgetting to initialize a Box param and assign the value returned by the openBox function to it.
After Hive initialization you should have something like this:
Box<myValue> boxValue = await Hive.openBox("myKey");
Important: the retrieval method will dependend based on what you need to do and, more importantly, how you saved your data in the first place.
Let's say you saved data like this:
await boxValue.add(value);
By adding data like this, the key assigned to the value will be an auto-incremented one, so that trying to retrieve it with a specific key that never was assigned in the first place will fail.
If you did add the data like this:
await boxValue.put("myKey", value);
then you will be able to successfully fetch it using the intended key.
You can do the following:
void main() async {
await Hive.initFlutter();
await Hive.openBox('workoutBox'); //<- make sure you await this
runApp(const MyApp());
}
...
_save() { // <- can be a synchronous function
final box = Hive.box('workoutBox'); //<- get an already opened box, no await necessary here
// save doc id somewhere
final Id = doc.id;
box.put("Id", Id);
}
I have written an example app and a Flutter Cubits + Hooks + Hive DB tutorial. I have the following AppDatabase class there:
const String _bookBox = 'book';
#Singleton()
class AppDatabase {
AppDatabase._constructor();
static final AppDatabase _instance = AppDatabase._constructor();
factory AppDatabase() => _instance;
late Box<BookDb> _booksBox;
Future<void> initialize() async {
await Hive.initFlutter();
Hive.registerAdapter<BookDb>(BookDbAdapter());
_booksBox = await Hive.openBox<BookDb>(_bookBox);
}
Future<void> saveBook(Book book) async {
await _booksBox.put(
book.id,
BookDb(
book.id,
book.title,
book.author,
book.publicationDate,
book.about,
book.readAlready,
));
}
Future<void> deleteBook(int id) async {
await _booksBox.delete(id);
}
...
I've writen some code that provides a ApiService to a StateNotifier. The ApiService has a dependency on a authenticatorclient - The auth client has to be created asynchronously as it uses sharedprefs to get a token.
Im just trying to figure out if theirs a more elegant way to how I've written this. Basically when the service apiService is injected into the StateNotifier it could be nullable... That to me is a bit of a code smell.
So in brief this is what im doing...
use a FutureProvider to Instantiate the RestClientwith a Dio
authenticatorClient = FutureProvider<RestClient>((ref) async {
final prefs = await SharedPreferences.getInstance();
final dio = Dio();
...
return RestClient(dio);
}
And then I watch that and use a MaybeWhen to return the service
final clientCreatorWatchProvider = Provider<ApiService?>((ref) => ref
.watch(authenticatorClient)
.whenData((value) => ApiService(value))
.maybeWhen(
data: (service) => service,
orElse: () => null,
));
So the bit I dont like is the orElse returning null
And then my StateNotifier is watching...
final AppState = StateNotifierProvider<AppNotifier, String>(
(ref) => AppNotifier(ref.watch(clientCreatorWatchProvider)));
class AppNotifier extends StateNotifier<String> {
final ApiService? apiService;
AppNotifier(this.apiService) : super("loading") {
init();
}
...
}
Any thoughts on the above approach?
Thanks
One way to solve this problem is to initialize SharedPreferences outside of a provider. You can then use ProviderScope to override a synchronous provider, eliminating the need to work with AsyncValue.
When you initialize your app, do the following:
final sharedPreferences = Provider<SharedPreferences>((_) => throw UnimplementedError());
Future<void> main() async {
final sharedPrefs = await SharedPreferences.getInstance();
runApp(
ProviderScope(
overrides: [
sharedPreferences.overrideWithValue(sharedPrefs),
],
child: MyApp(),
),
);
}
Now you could write your providers like so:
final authenticatorClient = Provider<RestClient>((ref) {
final prefs = ref.watch(sharedPreferences);
final dio = Dio();
...
return RestClient(dio);
}
final clientCreatorWatchProvider = Provider<ApiService>((ref) {
final authClient = ref.watch(authenticatorClient);
return ApiService(authClient);
});