You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As your package uses GetIt, would it still work if we registered dependencies using the GetIt syntax?
For example:
final getIt = GetIt.instance;
void setup() {
getIt.registerSingleton<AppModel>(AppModel());
}
I only ask because if I'm being honest, I think the cubes syntax is less readable than the standard GetIt syntax with the use of the type parameter. In addition, it looks like your missing a few features from the standard GetIt syntax such as Scopes and the ability to unregister a dependency.
I think cubes would be much more popular if instead of creating your own abstraction you simply let people use the GetIt syntax or even simply created a global variable called cubes like the 'getit' variable in the example above so that our code would look like this:
// global variable defined in the cubes package
final cubes = GetIt.instance;
// use in our code
void setup() {
cubes.registerSingleton<AppModel>(AppModel());
}
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As your package uses GetIt, would it still work if we registered dependencies using the GetIt syntax?
For example:
I only ask because if I'm being honest, I think the cubes syntax is less readable than the standard GetIt syntax with the use of the type parameter. In addition, it looks like your missing a few features from the standard GetIt syntax such as Scopes and the ability to unregister a dependency.
I think cubes would be much more popular if instead of creating your own abstraction you simply let people use the GetIt syntax or even simply created a global variable called cubes like the 'getit' variable in the example above so that our code would look like this:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: