Update get_it_impl.dart to dispose in reverse order

[bvoq]

There are a few situations, where one instance depends on an instance you created before.
In all of these situations, it makes more sense to dispose of the widgets in reverse order.

[escamoteur]

Hey, after reading the docs of the linked hash map it seems that that would solve the problem without hurting performance. Good idea Cheers Thomas Am 22. Nov. 2023, 10:00 +0100 schrieb Kevin De Keyser ***@***.***>:

…

@bvoq commented on this pull request. In lib/get_it_impl.dart: > @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ class _Scope { Future<void> reset({required bool dispose}) async { if (dispose) { - for (final factory in allFactories) { + for (final factory in allFactories.reversed) { Perhaps an easier way would be to use LinkedHashMap instead, which is order-preserving by default. Would you be interested in such a PR? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[bvoq]

Alright I've added tests, one of which fails with the current version but not with this new version.

Minor note: I wouldn't rename the type of factoriesByName, since:
final factoriesByName = <String?, Map<Type, _ServiceFactory<Object, dynamic, dynamic>>>{}; is of type:

Map<String?, Map<Type, _ServiceFactory<Object, dynamic, dynamic>>>

which is not of subtype:

// ignore: prefer_collection_literals
final factoriesByName = LinkedHashMap<String?,LinkedHashMap<Type, _ServiceFactory<Object, dynamic, dynamic>>>();

Without renaming the type, this could be released as a minor update.
If we rename the type, it might break the clients and would require a major version update.

I'm ok with it either way, do you want to edit the CHANGELOG.md with the correct date?

Thanks for looking at the PR!

[escamoteur]

Why do you think a change of the type of this this internal data structure might break any apps that use get_it? Change log addition would be fine. Also do we already have a note in the docs pointing out that we now dispose in reverse order?

[bvoq]

Why do you think a change of the type of this this internal data structure might break any apps that use get_it?

I was wrong, my bad. I didn't see that it was part of a private class _Scope.
I've changed the type now and made the changelog more explicit.
I've also added information to the docs pointing out that they are disposed in the reverse order.

[escamoteur]

thanks a lot for this fine PR, I just published a new version