-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[shared_preferences] Platform implementations of async api #6965
Changes from 18 commits
0b619b4
b8b4643
3216359
351e189
167a191
751b7ab
966cc82
f5a7965
6d2127b
5e80acb
6a148c4
f3002f1
48a294f
9d4ce28
2b7b3a6
fa7389d
bc85c30
9780d68
9249648
475237f
94498a0
78ace3a
89ed80a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Are you stuck on legacy as the prefix? The meaning of legacy can change over time so v1 might be a better prefix. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think legacy is pretty fitting, as it is now legacy code. It implies future intent to deprecate the code There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The issue is legacy assumes 2 states, Legacy and Current and does not account for a 3rd state to exist at the same time. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is something I don't remember to think about until you raise it in reviews, but I'm trying to internalize it into my normal review process :) I agree it would have been better not to use that name, but in this case I think it'll end up okay, because this was a big change to an API surface that we very explicitly don't want a lot of churn to, and hasn't been fundamentally changed like this in the entire life of the plugin. It's a very different case than, e.g., Android older API version codepaths, where this has come up before, where we can easily get new ones every year. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yep I did not view it as a blocker which was why it came paired with an approval. It was just the dismissal that "I think legacy is pretty fitting, as it is now legacy code." that I wanted to expand upon since that misses my entire reason for commenting on the name. I should have linked to the style guide. https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/master/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md#avoid-newold-modifiers-in-code There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This code, and the names specifically, can also change any time without breaking anything, as this is just the native platform implementation. If there does end up being another massive overhaul before it's deprecated, we can just change it to something else at that time. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There's always There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. yes there is hahaha 😭 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Totally fair, I was missing the expanded context so I appreciate the comment :) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@reidbaker Is this going to cause issues for clients? It looks like this would be the first of our plugins using 1.8.x.
@tarrinneal What exactly was the error when this was 1.7.10 like our other plugins?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
https://logs.chromium.org/logs/flutter/buildbucket/cr-buildbucket/8741408197539124465/+/u/Run_package_tests/native_unit_tests/stdout?format=raw
Integration tests run fine though, only unit tests fail. There may be some other underlying issue.