Replace [FinderBase] with [Finder] in the documentation of Matchers #168279
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't it more accurate to say FinderBase instead of Finder? Something like findsNothing could be used with SemanticsFinder, which is a FinderBase and not a Finder.
Edit: In your example in the issue #168230, you compare findsNothing with findsOneWidget, but findsOneWidget should operate only on Finders, so I think that is correct as-is.
|
I cannot understand you. Both FindsNothing and FindsOneWidget are instances of the same class: _FindsCountMatcher, so if something should work with one, it should work with the other, and if something should not work with one, it should not work with the other. |
|
Yes please go ahead and update the PR and I will take another look. Thank you! |
|
I did replace [Finder] with [FinderBase] in the doc comments of Matchers. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think these are all correct as-is, unless I missed one. These all seem to operate on widgets and therefore it's more accurate to say Finder and not FinderBase.
I think we can probably close this PR and close #168230, unless there is a specific mismatch that you see in the use of Finder vs. FinderBase.
| /// Asserts that the [Finder] locates at least one widget in the widget tree. | ||
| /// Asserts that the [FinderBase] locates at least one widget in the widget tree. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this was correct as-is. findsWidgets deals with widgets and so does Finder.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
findsWidgets is an instance of the _FindsCountMatcher class.
This is the signature of the matches() method of _FindsCountMatcher:
bool matches(covariant FinderBase<dynamic> finder, Map<dynamic, dynamic> matchState)As you can see, it takes a FinderBase, not a Finder, as its first argument. So I think that FinderBase is the correct type that should be used in this doc comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah ok you're right, they do all operate on FinderBase even when they have "widgets" in the name. I even see this below for findsOneWidget:
This is equivalent to the preferred [findsOne] method.
Indeed findsOne and findsOneWidget are identical.
| /// Asserts that the [Finder] locates a single widget that has at | ||
| /// Asserts that the [FinderBase] locates a single widget that has at |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This one looks like it actually should be Finder right?
| /// Asserts that the [Finder] locates at least one widget in the widget tree. | ||
| /// Asserts that the [FinderBase] locates at least one widget in the widget tree. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah ok you're right, they do all operate on FinderBase even when they have "widgets" in the name. I even see this below for findsOneWidget:
This is equivalent to the preferred [findsOne] method.
Indeed findsOne and findsOneWidget are identical.
| /// Asserts that the [Finder] locates a single widget that has no | ||
| /// Asserts that the [FinderBase] locates a single widget that has no |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also this one should stay Finder.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. This should stay Finder.
| /// Asserts that the [Finder] locates a single widget that has no | ||
| /// Asserts that the [FinderBase] locates a single widget that has no |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. This should stay Finder.
| /// Asserts that a [Finder], [Future<ui.Image>], or [ui.Image] matches the | ||
| /// Asserts that a [FinderBase], [Future<ui.Image>], or [ui.Image] matches the | ||
| /// golden image file identified by [key], with an optional [version] number. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// For the case of a [Finder], the [Finder] must match exactly one widget and | ||
| /// For the case of a [FinderBase], the [FinderBase] must match exactly one widget and |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like it's a Finder:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. This should stay Finder.
| /// Asserts that a [Finder] locates a single object whose root RenderObject is | ||
| /// Asserts that a [FinderBase] locates a single object whose root RenderObject is |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Finder:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. This should stay Finder.
| /// Asserts that a [Finder] locates a single object whose root RenderObject | ||
| /// Asserts that a [FinderBase] locates a single object whose root RenderObject |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Finder:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. This should stay Finder.
| /// Asserts that a [Finder] locates a single object whose root RenderObject | ||
| /// Asserts that a [FinderBase] locates a single object whose root RenderObject |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Finder:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. This should stay Finder.
| /// Asserts that a [Finder] locates a single object whose root RenderObject | ||
| /// Asserts that a [FinderBase] locates a single object whose root RenderObject |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Finder:
| /// Asserts that a [Finder] locates a single object whose root RenderObject | ||
| /// Asserts that a [FinderBase] locates a single object whose root RenderObject |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Finder:
|
I have updated the pull request based on the last investigation. |
|
@justinmc Is there any additional needed requirements to merge this PR? |
Replace [FinderBase] with [Finder] in the doc comments of Matchers.
This is my try to fix #168230