feat(dart_frog_cli): add dart_frog_new_brick for routes

[renancaraujo]

Status

READY

Description

Extracted from #616, adds the "new" brick with the implementation for route creation

This is the bulk of #260

Type of Change

• ✨ New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• 🛠️ Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• ❌ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• 🧹 Code refactor
• ✅ Build configuration change
• 📝 Documentation
• 🗑️ Chore

[alestiago]

Excited to get this merged, I left some comments. Let me know what you think! Besides, I also tested the tool this are some interesting findings:

---

Given the file structure:

hello
-- index.dart
-- world.py # Not a dart file!

Then doing mason make dart_frog_new world.

I get as expected:

hello/
-- index.dart
-- world.py
-- world.dart

Do we have (or eventually within e2e) a test to verify this behaviour?

---

Given the file structure:

hello[id].dart

Then doing mason make dart_frog_new hello[id]/ee[id].

Gives:

hello[id]/
-- index.dart
-- ee[id].dart

The content of ee[id].dart is not valid Dart code, since it has two declarations with the same name.

import 'package:dart_frog/dart_frog.dart';
Response onRequest(
  RequestContext context,
  String id,
  String id,
) {
  return Response(body: 'Welcome to Dart Frog!');
}

---

Given:

hello/
-- index.dart

Doing mason make dart_frog_new hello.

Fails as expected but immediately after reporting:

Failed to create type: /hello already exists.
✗ Making dart_frog_new (15ms)
type 'Null' is not a subtype of type 'Object' # This line is not a nice error message

Is the last error line intended?

[renancaraujo]

Do we have (or eventually within e2e) a test to verify this behaviour?

Goo idea, will add to the doc

[renancaraujo]

The content of ee[id].dart is not valid Dart code, since it has two declarations with the same name.

Good catch, added a ceghck for that, will add to the doc as well

[renancaraujo]

Closing and reopening to kick actions

[renancaraujo]

Is the last error line intended?

It is not, but it happens with you use Mason directly since it always runs the brick and postgen even if pregen fails. That doesn't happen when integrated with our cli.