We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
In 3.0, some classes will likely be renamed:
Provider > SyncProvider Notifier > SyncNotifier AsyncNotifierProvider > FutureNotifierProvider AsyncNotifier > FutureNotifier ProviderBase > Provider NotifierBase > Notifier
Provider
SyncProvider
Notifier
SyncNotifier
AsyncNotifierProvider
FutureNotifierProvider
AsyncNotifier
FutureNotifier
ProviderBase
NotifierBase
This removes the weird Base in the name of some abstract classes.
Base
And it aligns FutureProvider and AsyncNotifier ; similarly to how we have StreamProvider and StreamNotifier.
FutureProvider
StreamProvider
StreamNotifier
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Provider>SyncProvider and the Notifier variant are not necessary btw. If we also do #3904 then it's find to keep Provider as is.
But I think it's important to rename AsyncNotifier to FutureNotifier
Sorry, something went wrong.
In case it wasn't obvious, we'd have a migration command. Possibly using dart fix itself if I manage to use it. Otherwise a custom one
dart fix
rrousselGit
No branches or pull requests
In 3.0, some classes will likely be renamed:
Provider
>SyncProvider
Notifier
>SyncNotifier
AsyncNotifierProvider
>FutureNotifierProvider
AsyncNotifier
>FutureNotifier
ProviderBase
>Provider
NotifierBase
>Notifier
This removes the weird
Base
in the name of some abstract classes.And it aligns
FutureProvider
andAsyncNotifier
; similarly to how we haveStreamProvider
andStreamNotifier
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: