I am beginner to flutter/dart and has read that we don't have public/private/protected access specifier for dart but if we want to make private instance variable, we can make the use of underscore(_) operator but it will not make the variable private to the class but to its own library, So what does it actually mean ?
Dart privacy is indeed only on a per library basis.
A name which begins with _ is a library private name. A private identifier, like _tmp, is considered a different name than a similarly spelled identifier, also _tmp, which occurs in a different library.
That means that code in a different library cannot access the private name _tmp because it can't even express it. If it tries to write _tmp, it can only refer to a private name of its own library instead.
The choice of embedding access control in the name makes sense when you remember that Dart has dynamic invocations. If you write dynamic x = ...; x.foo();, then this should call the foo method of x if there is one. To do this efficiently, it would be too much of an overhead if each dynamic invocation should also figure out where the name originally comes from and whether it's accessible to the caller. Dart avoids this overhead by making all public names visible, and all private names inexpressible.
The goal of privacy is to separate public interface API from internal implementation API, and to avoid naming conflicts.
You can write your private names without fear that they conflict with someone else's names, and without risking someone thinking they are meant for public use.
Dart does not try to protect code from other code in the same library. It's supposed to be the same author anyway, so they can be trusted to use the API responsibly (and if not, it's on themselves).
What it means for you as a user is: The library is the unit of code. You can make libraries which contains only a single class. The library privacy is class privacy for that class. Or you can create libraries with many classes and top-level functions which can all see each other's private names.
That means you should base your modularity on the need of classes to share implementation, and not really anything else. You can always build a larger API by exporting other libraries.
When creating a Pub package, I would create your own internal libraries, inside the lib/src/ directory, giving them whatever size is convenient, and then export your public API from the package main file in lib/.
a library/module/model refferes to the class itself, so any variables/methods are only accessable to the class itself. any class from the outside world trying to access this property, will not be able to. basically its own library means the class itself
Related
I want to build up a tests library and keep it separated from the libraries under development. My first thought is to go for a structure like the following:
PensLib
--Variants
----BallPoint
----FountainPen
----Tests
------TB_BallPoint
HammocksLib
--Variants
----SingleHammock
----DoubleHammock
----Tests
------TB_DoubleHammock
--Systems
----IndoorWalls
----OutdoorWallAndTree
----CoconutPalms
----Tests
------TB_IndoorWalls
Tests
--PensLib
----Variants
------Test_BallPoint // extends PensLib.Variants.Tests.TB_BallPoint
--HammocksLib
----Variants
------Test_DoubleHammock // extends HammocksLib.Variants.Tests.TB_DoubleHammock
----Systems
------Test_IndoorWalls // extends HammocksLib.Systems.Tests.TB_IndoorWalls
For now let's assume that the way I structure my libraries make sense (which most likely doesn't). I will soon ask more questions on good practices in setting up the testing environment in Dymola and with the Testing Library.
My question is about the correct way to handle relative and absolute paths within models, if possible at all.
The model PensLib.Variants.Tests.TB_BallPoint is used for developing the variant BallPoint
The model Tests.PensLib.Variants.Tests_BallPoint is used for automated testing
I want the model Test_BallPoint to extend the model TB_BallPoint, but I cannot link them. I guess the absolute path PensLib.Variants.Tests.TB_BallPoint is treated as a relative one, since PensLib is found "on the way out" of the Tests library, and from there it goes looking for the rest of the path. Is there perhaps a way to control the path, kind of ..\..\..\PensLib\Variants\Tests\TB_BallPoint?
As you already noted such a setup makes troubles. There are ways around that, namely global name lookup and imports, which I explain briefly further below.
Both solutions are nice when you have such a case in a few situations. But if you have to use it all the time, you make your setup unnecessarily complicated.
Hence, I suggest to make yourself the live easier and change your package structure:
Either create a dedicated test library for every library, maybe PensLib_Tests and HammocksLib_Tests
Or rename the packages in the Tests library and don't use the exact library names
Global name lookup
You can use absolute class paths. They are denoted with a leading ., so this should work:
extends .PensLib.Variants.Tests.TB_BallPoint;
See Modelica Specification chapter 5: Scoping, Name Lookup, and Flattening for details, especially 5.3.3 Global Name Lookup
Importing
You can simply import the library. Lookup of imports is always performed globally.
import PensLib;
extends PensLib.Variants.Tests.TB_BallPoint;
Now I have some experience in using the Zend Framework. I want to go deeper in the topic and rewrite some old php projects.
What is the best place to save own functions and classes?
And how do I tell Zend where they are? Or is there already a folder for own stuff? May I have different folders for different files?
For example I want to save a php document with the name math_b.php which includes several special functions to calculate and another one date_b.php which has abilities for datetime stuff. Is that possible or shall I have different files for every function?
I would also like to reuse the functions in other projects and then just copy the folders.
There is no single "right" answer for this. However, there are several general guidelines/principles that I commonly employ.
Do not pollute global scope
Namespace your code and keep all functions is classes. So, rather than:
function myFunction($x) {
// do stuff with $x and return a value
}
I would have:
namespace MyVendorName\SomeComponent;
class SomeUtils
{
public static function myFunction($x)
{
// do stuff with $x and return a value
}
}
Usage is then:
use MyVendorName\SomeComponent\SomeUtils;
$val = SomeUtils::myFunction($x);
Why bother with all this? Without this kind of namespacing, as you bring more code into your projects from other sources - and as you share/publish your code for others to consume in their projects - you will eventually encounter name conflicts between their functions/variables and yours. Good fences make good neighbors.
Use an autoloader
The old days of having tons of:
require '/path/to/class.php';
in your consumer code are long gone. A better approach is to tell PHP - typically during some bootstrap process - where to find the class MyVendor\MyComponent\MyClass. This process is called autoloading.
Most code these days conforms to the PSR-0/PSR-4 standard that maps name-spaced classnames to file-paths relative to a file root.
In ZF1, one typically adds the ./library folder to the PHP include_path in ./public/index.php and then add your vendor namespace into the autoloaderNameSpaces array in ./application/config.ini:
autoloaderNameSpaces[] = 'MyVendor';
and places a class like MyVendor\MyComponent\MyClass in the file:
./library/MyVendor/MyComponent/MyClass.php
You can then reference a class of the form MyVendor\MyComponent\MyClass simply with:
// At top of consuming file
use MyVendor\MyComponent\MyClass;
// In the consuming page/script/class.
$instance = new MyClass(); // instantiation
$val = MyClass::myStaticMethod(); // static method call
Determine the scope of usage
If I have functionality is required only for a particular class, then I keep that function as a method (or a collection of methods) in the class in which it is used.
If I have some functionality that will be consumed in multiple places in a single project, then I might break it out into a single class in my own library namespace, perhaps MyVendor.
If I think that a function/class will be consumed by multiple projects, then I break it out into its own project with its own repo (on Github, for example), make it accessible via Composer, optimally registering it with Packagist, and pay close attention to semantic versioning so that consumers of my package receive a stable and predictable product.
Copying folders from one project into another is do-able, of course, but it often runs into problems as you fix bugs, add functionality, and (sometimes) break backward-compatibility. That's why it is usually preferable to have those functions/classes in a separate, semantically-versioned project that serves as a single source-of-truth for that code.
Conclusion
Breaking functionality out into separate, namespaced classes that are autoloaded in a standard way gives plenty of "space" in which to develop custom functionality that is more easily consumed, more easily re-used, and more easily tested (a large topic for another time).
Let's say I have a number of GWT modules which are used as libraries, and one module with an entry point which inherits all of the library modules.
Each of the submodules needs to access a single instance of SomeClass.
If I call GWT.create(SomeClass.class) in modules A & B, do I get the same instance? If so, is this guaranteed?
No. GWT.create(SomeClass.class) compiles to new SomeClass(), unless there is a rebind rule of some kind - a replace-with or a generate-with rule will cause this to instead invoke the default constructor of whatever type is selected by those rules.
This means that GWT.create is not a suitable way to provide access to a singleton instance. Instead, consider some DI tool like Gin, or manual DI by always passing around the same instance. It is also possible to use the static keyword to keep a single instance where all code compiled into the same app can reference it.
Is it recommended that we place an Import on a property instead of a field? I tried it on a field and it is working but Resharper is telling me a warning that the field was never initialized.
ReSharper doesn't recognize that MEF will be setting the variable and since there is no guarntee that MEF will be setting the variable (example if it isn't put into a container for example), so it is reasonable for ReSharper to warn about this. You can either ignore it or simply initialize the field to null (or default(T)).
As for whether or not you should use a property or field I think using a field is fine (assuming it is not public). I generally reserve properties for things I want to expose publicly. One special case to consider here is that there are some issues having Imports on private members in low trust scenarios like SL or paritial trust because MEF uses reflection and you cannot use private reflection in some of those scenarios.
I'm currently making good use of GWT's ClientBundles in my app. It works fine, but I have a large number of resources and it becomes tedious to manually create Java interfaces for each file:
#ClientBundle.Source("world_war_ii.txt")
public ExternalTextResource worldWarII();
#ClientBundle.Source("spain.txt")
public ExternalTextResource spain();
#ClientBundle.Source("france.txt")
public ExternalTextResource france();
I'd like to be able to (perhaps at compile time) dynamically list every *.txt file in a given directory, and then have run-time access to them, perhaps as an array ExternalTextResource[], rather than having to explicitly list them in my code. There may be hundreds of such resources, and enumerating them manually as code would be very painful and unmaintainable.
The ClientBundle documentation explicitly says that "to provide a file-system abstraction" is a non-goal, so unfortunately this seems to disallow what I'm trying to do.
What's the best way to deal with a large number of external resources that must be available at run-time? Would a generator help?
There's an automatic generator for CssResource - maybe you could look at its code and modify it to your needs?
I ended up following this advice: perform the file operations on the server, and then return a list of the file (meta)data via an RPC call.
This turns out to be fairly simple, and also allows me to return lightweight references (filenames) in the list, which I use to populate a Tree client-side; when the user clicks on a TreeItem the actual text contents are downloaded.