Get a hold of getter/setter function #13389
Comments
|
Operators too :) Added Area-Language, Triaged labels. |
|
A long time ago, we proposed a uniform syntax for property extraction, that would have covered both methods, getters, setters and operators. Say o#m or o!m. People screamed they needed it to look like JS, with a dot. The fact that this would not work for getters was pointed out, but dismissed as a minor nuisance. You can of course write (){o.getterName} explicitly at the cost of a few more keystrokes. Similar workarounds for setters and operators. Set owner to @gbracha. |
|
Just a note that we are looking into this again. |
|
This comment was originally written by @seaneagan My objection when this was originally proposed was that it breaks the symmetry between methods and Function-valued getters. o#f would mean something different if f were a method than if it were a Function-valued getter, so refactoring between those two would be a breaking change which is unfortunate, but also not immediately obvious, so that breaking change may be unwittingly introduced. This would make issue #2849 and issue #1616 impossible. Also the proposed syntax e.g. o#m would be useful for issue #13056. |
DartBot
added
Type-Enhancement
area-language
kevmoo
added
type-enhancement
|
Closing this since it asks for a feature which we added, then removed (#27518). |
This issue was originally filed by Misko.H...@gmail.com
class Foo {
String _foo;
get foo() => _foo;
method() => null;
}
I can closures a method like this
Function method = (new Foo()).method;
This allows me to pass the method closure into callbacks of other API. It is equally useful to pass closure for getter or setter functions. But there is no way to closures the getter/setter. The following code snippet returns a value rather then closurized function.
(new Foo()).method; // returns value rather then function closure which returns a value
Perhaps some other syntax by which I could get a hold of the getter/setter?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: