Almost all of the code is just adopting to changes to the APIs of
`package:native_assets_builder`, `package:native_assets_cli` and
`package:native_toolchain_c`
There's only two semantic changes
* Removes a test that checks for a verification error if a build hook
produces a static library if the preferred linking mode is dynamic:
=> The test is written in a very hacky way. By monkey patching the build
config.json that flutter build actually made. This monkey patching
relies on package:cli_config which is now no longer used.
=> The actual code that checks for this mismatch lives in
dart-lang/native repository and is tested there. So there's really no
need to duplicate that.
* The `package:native_assets_builder` no longer knows about code assets.
This is something a user of that package (e.g. flutter tools) adds. Now
the dry-run functionality will invoke build hooks who produce code
assets without an architecture.
=> The `package:native_assets_builder` used to expand such a code asset
to N different code assets (one for each supported architecture)
=> This logic was now moved to flutter tools. => In the near future
we're going to this dry-run complexity, which will then also get rid of
this uglyness (of expanding to all archs of an OS).
We added `use_modular_headers!` to our `Podfile`s as we originally planned to phase out `use_frameworks!` (see https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/42204). However, our plans have now changed and we are instead phasing out CocoaPods entirely in favor of Swift Package Manager.
CocoaPods's `use_frameworks!` and `use_modular_headers!` are two different overlapping options that should not be used together. This change removes the `use_modular_headers!` from the macOS `Podfile` and the iOS Swift `Podfile` (the iOS Objective-C template was recently deprecated https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/155867).
This change only affects _new_ Flutter apps. This change does not include an automatic migration as that could break existing apps. Instead, users are encouraged to migrate from CocoaPods to Swift Package Manager.
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/156259
Reverts: flutter/flutter#157032
Initiated by: gmackall
Reason for reverting: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/157032#issuecomment-2436336078
Original PR Author: gmackall
Reviewed By: {reidbaker, bartekpacia}
This change reverts the following previous change:
I recently noticed the following log when building an app in verbose mode:
```
This Android Gradle plugin (8.1.0) was tested up to compileSdk = 33 (and compileSdkPreview = "UpsideDownCakePrivacySandbox").
You are strongly encouraged to update your project to use a newer
Android Gradle plugin that has been tested with compileSdk = 35.
```
It looks like AGP would like us to use a newer AGP version if we want to use compileSdk 35 (which we do). This pr upgrades the tests, in advance of updating the templates.
I recently noticed the following log when building an app in verbose mode:
```
This Android Gradle plugin (8.1.0) was tested up to compileSdk = 33 (and compileSdkPreview = "UpsideDownCakePrivacySandbox").
You are strongly encouraged to update your project to use a newer
Android Gradle plugin that has been tested with compileSdk = 35.
```
It looks like AGP would like us to use a newer AGP version if we want to use compileSdk 35 (which we do). This pr upgrades the tests, in advance of updating the templates.
This is simply removing unnecessary parenthesis from various places. This change is because of a change to the unnecessary_parentesis lint that will trigger there. Here is the CL https://dart-review.googlesource.com/c/sdk/+/390161.
- https://github.com/dart-lang/linter/issues/4996
If anything else is needed please let me know.
I'd like to ask for this PR to wait a bit until the bots are run again on that CL so that I can be sure nothing else will trigger, I will come back here and update this whenever everything is complete. Thanks!
Allows applying of `include_flutter.groovy` via the `apply from:` syntax, which allows using a host app that is using the Gradle Kotlin DSL (the default these days when creating an Android app in AS).
Explanation: The `include_flutter.groovy` script is currently not able to be called by Kotlin gradle files, because it is [intended to be invoked with the following lines](https://docs.flutter.dev/add-to-app/android/project-setup#depend-on-the-modules-source-code):
```
setBinding(new Binding([gradle: this])) // new
evaluate(new File( // new
settingsDir.parentFile, // new
'flutter_module/.android/include_flutter.groovy' // new
))
```
`setBinding` isn't part of the Kotlin gradle DSL, and there isn't (that I can find) an easy Kotlin equivalent. If this binding isn't set, the reference to `gradle` in `include_flutter.groovy` is wrong, which breaks the script.
This PR modifies `include_flutter.groovy` to also support being invoked through the standard way of invoking a script via the Gradle Groovy/Kotlin DSLs, which is `apply from:` (or it's slightly different Kotlin syntax). The start of the script identifies which of the two approaches is being used by checking if the binding is set, and then initializes some variables differently depending on the case.
If we land this, I believe we should update the example Gradle files for both the `kts` and `groovy` cases to prefer the `apply from` syntax as I think this is the syntax most developers would be more familiar with already seeing in their Gradle files.
Reverts: flutter/flutter#156440
Initiated by: zanderso
Reason for reverting: Failing in post submit with
```
[2024-10-08 18:00:22.743647] [STDOUT] stdout: [!] CocoaPods could not find compatible versions for pod "Google-Mobile-Ads-SDK":
[2024-10-08 18:00:22.743695] [STDOUT] stdout: In Podfile:
[2024-10-08 18:00:22.743718] [STDOUT] stdout: google_mobile_ads (from `.symlinks/plugins/google_mobile_ads/ios`) was resolved t
Original PR Author: flutter-pub-roller-bot
Reviewed By: {fluttergithubbot}
This change reverts the following previous change:
This PR was generated by `flutter update-packages --force-upgrade`.
This pull request aims to improve code readability, based on feedback gathered in a recent design doc.
<br>
There are two factors that hugely impact how easy it is to understand a piece of code: **verbosity** and **complexity**.
Reducing **verbosity** is important, because boilerplate makes a project more difficult to navigate. It also has a tendency to make one's eyes gloss over, and subtle typos/bugs become more likely to slip through.
Reducing **complexity** makes the code more accessible to more people. This is especially important for open-source projects like Flutter, where the code is read by those who make contributions, as well as others who read through source code as they debug their own projects.
<hr>
<br>
The following examples show how pattern-matching might affect these two factors:
<details> <summary><h3>Example 1 (GOOD)</h3> [click to expand]</summary>
```dart
if (ancestor case InheritedElement(:final InheritedTheme widget)) {
themes.add(widget);
}
```
Without using patterns, this might expand to
```dart
if (ancestor is InheritedElement) {
final InheritedWidget widget = ancestor.widget;
if (widget is InheritedTheme) {
themes.add(widget);
}
}
```
Had `ancestor` been a non-local variable, it would need to be "converted" as well:
```dart
final Element ancestor = this.ancestor;
if (ancestor is InheritedElement) {
final InheritedWidget inheritedWidget = ancestor.widget;
if (widget is InheritedTheme) {
themes.add(theme);
}
}
```
</details>
<details> <summary><h3>Example 2 (BAD) </h3> [click to expand]</summary>
```dart
if (widget case PreferredSizeWidget(preferredSize: Size(:final double height))) {
return height;
}
```
Assuming `widget` is a non-local variable, this would expand to:
```dart
final Widget widget = this.widget;
if (widget is PreferredSizeWidget) {
return widget.preferredSize.height;
}
```
<br>
</details>
In both of the examples above, an `if-case` statement simultaneously verifies that an object meets the specified criteria and performs a variable assignment accordingly.
But there are some differences: Example 2 uses a more deeply-nested pattern than Example 1 but makes fewer useful checks.
**Example 1:**
- checks that `ancestor` is an `InheritedElement`
- checks that the inherited element's `widget` is an `InheritedTheme`
**Example 2:**
- checks that `widget` is a `PreferredSizeWidget`
(every `PreferredSizeWidget` has a `size` field, and every `Size` has a `height` field)
<br>
<hr>
I feel hesitant to try presenting a set of cut-and-dry rules as to which scenarios should/shouldn't use pattern-matching, since there are an abundance of different types of patterns, and an abundance of different places where they might be used.
But hopefully the conversations we've had recently will help us converge toward a common intuition of how pattern-matching can best be utilized for improved readability.
<br><br>
- resolves https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/152313
- Design Doc: [flutter.dev/go/dart-patterns](https://flutter.dev/go/dart-patterns)
*Replace this paragraph with a description of what this PR is changing or adding, and why. Consider including before/after screenshots.*
*List which issues are fixed by this PR. You must list at least one issue. An issue is not required if the PR fixes something trivial like a typo.*
*If you had to change anything in the [flutter/tests] repo, include a link to the migration guide as per the [breaking change policy].*
Rolls native deps to the latest version, and cleans up deprecated field from template.
Tests:
* All the unit and integration tests for native assets. The template and dependencies are exercised in the integration test.
Since `package:native_assets_builder` already checks for having no static libraries as output, the custom check in flutter_tools is removed. The tests stubbing out the native assets builder exercising the custom check are also removed. (The integration tests now check for the error message from the native assets builder.)
