{%- comment %} WARNING: Do NOT EDIT this file directly. It is autogenerated by the script in pkg/analyzer/tool/diagnostics/generate.dart in the sdk repository. Update instructions: https://github.com/dart-lang/site-www/issues/1949 {% endcomment -%}
This page lists diagnostic messages produced by the Dart analyzer, with details about what those messages mean and how you can fix your code. For more information about the analyzer, see Customizing static analysis.
This page uses the following terms.
A constant context is a region of code in which it isn‘t necessary to include the const keyword because it’s implied by the fact that everything in that region is required to be a constant. The following locations are constant contexts:
Everything inside a list, map or set literal that's prefixed by the const keyword. Example:
var l = const [/*constant context*/];
The arguments inside an invocation of a constant constructor. Example:
var p = const Point(/*constant context*/);
The initializer for a variable that's prefixed by the const keyword. Example:
const v = /*constant context*/;
Annotations
The expression in a case clause. Example:
void f(int e) { switch (e) { case /*constant context*/: break; } }
The analyzer produces the following diagnostics for code that doesn't conform to the language specification or that might work in unexpected ways.
The {0} ‘{1}’ is always abstract in the supertype.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an inherited member is referenced using super, but there is no concrete implementation of the member in the superclass chain. Abstract members can't be invoked.
The following code produces this diagnostic because B doesn't inherit a concrete implementation of a:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { int get a; } class B extends A { int get a => super.[!a!]; } {% endprettify %}
Remove the invocation of the abstract member, possibly replacing it with an invocation of a concrete member.
A member named ‘{0}’ is defined in extensions ‘{1}’ and ‘{2}’ and neither is more specific.
When code refers to a member of an object (for example, o.m() or o.m or o[i]) where the static type of o doesn‘t declare the member (m or [], for example), then the analyzer tries to find the member in an extension. For example, if the member is m, then the analyzer looks for extensions that declare a member named m and have an extended type that the static type of o can be assigned to. When there’s more than one such extension in scope, the extension whose extended type is most specific is selected.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when none of the extensions has an extended type that's more specific than the extended types of all of the other extensions, making the reference to the member ambiguous.
The following code produces this diagnostic because there's no way to choose between the member in E1 and the member in E2:
{% prettify dart %} extension E1 on String { int get charCount => 1; }
extension E2 on String { int get charCount => 2; }
void f(String s) { print(s.[!charCount!]); } {% endprettify %}
If you don't need both extensions, then you can delete or hide one of them.
If you need both, then explicitly select the one you want to use by using an extension override:
{% prettify dart %} extension E1 on String { int get charCount => length; }
extension E2 on String { int get charCount => length; }
void f(String s) { print(E2(s).charCount); } {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ is defined in the libraries {1}.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a name is referenced that is declared in two or more imported libraries.
Given a library (a.dart) that defines a class (C in this example):
{% prettify dart %} class A {} class C {} {% endprettify %}
And a library (b.dart) that defines a different class with the same name:
{% prettify dart %} class B {} class C {} {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘a.dart’; import ‘b.dart’;
void f([!C!] c1, [!C!] c2) {} {% endprettify %}
If any of the libraries aren't needed, then remove the import directives for them:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘a.dart’;
void f(C c1, C c2) {} {% endprettify %}
If the name is still defined by more than one library, then add a hide clause to the import directives for all except one library:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘a.dart’ hide C; import ‘b.dart’;
void f(C c1, C c2) {} {% endprettify %}
If you must be able to reference more than one of these types, then add a prefix to each of the import directives, and qualify the references with the appropriate prefix:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘a.dart’ as a; import ‘b.dart’ as b;
void f(a.C c1, b.C c2) {} {% endprettify %}
This literal contains both ‘Map’ and ‘Iterable’ spreads, which makes it impossible to determine whether the literal is a map or a set.
Because map and set literals use the same delimiters ({ and }), the analyzer looks at the type arguments and the elements to determine which kind of literal you meant. When there are no type arguments and all of the elements are spread elements (which are allowed in both kinds of literals), then the analyzer uses the types of the expressions that are being spread. If all of the expressions have the type Iterable, then it‘s a set literal; if they all have the type Map, then it’s a map literal.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when some of the expressions being spread have the type Iterable and others have the type Map, making it impossible for the analyzer to determine whether you are writing a map literal or a set literal.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} union(Map<String, String> a, List b, Map<String, String> c) => [!{...a, ...b, ...c}!]; {% endprettify %}
The list b can only be spread into a set, and the maps a and c can only be spread into a map, and the literal can't be both.
There are two common ways to fix this problem. The first is to remove all of the spread elements of one kind or another, so that the elements are consistent. In this case, that likely means removing the list and deciding what to do about the now unused parameter:
{% prettify dart %} union(Map<String, String> a, List b, Map<String, String> c) => {...a, ...c}; {% endprettify %}
The second fix is to change the elements of one kind into elements that are consistent with the other elements. For example, you can add the elements of the list as keys that map to themselves:
{% prettify dart %} union(Map<String, String> a, List b, Map<String, String> c) => {...a, for (String s in b) s: s, ...c}; {% endprettify %}
This literal must be either a map or a set, but the elements don't have enough information for type inference to work.
Because map and set literals use the same delimiters ({ and }), the analyzer looks at the type arguments and the elements to determine which kind of literal you meant. When there are no type arguments and all of the elements are spread elements (which are allowed in both kinds of literals) then the analyzer uses the types of the expressions that are being spread. If all of the expressions have the type Iterable, then it‘s a set literal; if they all have the type Map, then it’s a map literal.
This diagnostic is produced when none of the expressions being spread have a type that allows the analyzer to decide whether you were writing a map literal or a set literal.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} union(a, b) => [!{...a, ...b}!]; {% endprettify %}
The problem occurs because there are no type arguments, and there is no information about the type of either a or b.
There are three common ways to fix this problem. The first is to add type arguments to the literal. For example, if the literal is intended to be a map literal, you might write something like this:
{% prettify dart %} union(a, b) => <String, String>{...a, ...b}; {% endprettify %}
The second fix is to add type information so that the expressions have either the type Iterable or the type Map. You can add an explicit cast or, in this case, add types to the declarations of the two parameters:
{% prettify dart %} union(List a, List b) => {...a, ...b}; {% endprettify %}
The third fix is to add context information. In this case, that means adding a return type to the function:
{% prettify dart %} Set union(a, b) => {...a, ...b}; {% endprettify %}
In other cases, you might add a type somewhere else. For example, say the original code looks like this:
{% prettify dart %} union(a, b) { var x = [!{...a, ...b}!]; return x; } {% endprettify %}
You might add a type annotation on x, like this:
{% prettify dart %} union(a, b) { Map<String, String> x = {...a, ...b}; return x; } {% endprettify %}
The argument type ‘{0}’ can't be assigned to the parameter type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the static type of an argument can't be assigned to the static type of the corresponding parameter.
The following code produces this diagnostic because a num can't be assigned to a String:
{% prettify dart %} String f(String x) => x; String g(num y) => f([!y!]); {% endprettify %}
If possible, rewrite the code so that the static type is assignable. In the example above you might be able to change the type of the parameter y:
{% prettify dart %} String f(String x) => x; String g(String y) => f(y); {% endprettify %}
If that fix isn‘t possible, then add code to handle the case where the argument value isn’t the required type. One approach is to coerce other types to the required type:
{% prettify dart %} String f(String x) => x; String g(num y) => f(y.toString()); {% endprettify %}
Another approach is to add explicit type tests and fallback code:
{% prettify dart %} String f(String x) => x; String g(num y) => f(y is String ? y : ''); {% endprettify %}
If you believe that the runtime type of the argument will always be the same as the static type of the parameter, and you‘re willing to risk having an exception thrown at runtime if you’re wrong, then add an explicit cast:
{% prettify dart %} String f(String x) => x; String g(num y) => f(y as String); {% endprettify %}
‘{0}’ can‘t be used as a setter because it’s final.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it finds an invocation of a setter, but there's no setter because the field with the same name was declared to be final or const.
The following code produces this diagnostic because v is final:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final v = 0; }
f(C c) { c.[!v!] = 1; } {% endprettify %}
If you need to be able to set the value of the field, then remove the modifier final from the field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int v = 0; }
f(C c) { c.v = 1; } {% endprettify %}
The final variable ‘{0}’ can only be set once.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a local variable that was declared to be final is assigned after it was initialized.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x is final, so it can't have a value assigned to it after it was initialized:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { final x = 0; [!x!] = 3; print(x); } {% endprettify %}
Remove the keyword final, and replace it with var if there's no type annotation:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { var x = 0; x = 3; print(x); } {% endprettify %}
There isn’t a setter named ‘{0}’ in class ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a reference to a setter is found; there is no setter defined for the type; but there is a getter defined with the same name.
The following code produces this diagnostic because there is no setter named x in C, but there is a getter named x:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int get x => 0; set y(int p) {} }
void f(C c) { c.[!x!] = 1; } {% endprettify %}
If you want to invoke an existing setter, then correct the name:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int get x => 0; set y(int p) {} }
void f(C c) { c.y = 1; } {% endprettify %}
If you want to invoke the setter but it just doesn't exist yet, then declare it:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int get x => 0; set x(int p) {} set y(int p) {} }
void f(C c) { c.x = 1; } {% endprettify %}
Methods can't be assigned a value.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the target of an assignment is a method.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f can‘t be assigned a value because it’s a method:
{% prettify dart %} class C { void f() {}
void g() { [!f!] = null; } } {% endprettify %}
Rewrite the code so that there isn't an assignment to a method.
The built-in identifier ‘{0}’ can't be used as an extension name.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the name of an extension is a built-in identifier. Built-in identifiers can’t be used as extension names.
The following code produces this diagnostic because mixin is a built-in identifier:
{% prettify dart %} extension [!mixin!] on int {} {% endprettify %}
Choose a different name for the extension.
The built-in identifier ‘{0}’ can't be used as a type.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a built-in identifier is used where a type name is expected.
The following code produces this diagnostic because import can‘t be used as a type because it’s a built-in identifier:
{% prettify dart %} [!import!] x; {% endprettify %}
Replace the built-in identifier with the name of a valid type:
{% prettify dart %} List x; {% endprettify %}
The last statement of the ‘case’ should be ‘break’, ‘continue’, ‘rethrow’, ‘return’, or ‘throw’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the last statement in a case block isn't one of the required terminators: break, continue, rethrow, return, or throw.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the case block ends with an assignment:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int x) { switch (x) { [!case!] 0: x += 2; default: x += 1; } } {% endprettify %}
Add one of the required terminators:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int x) { switch (x) { case 0: x += 2; break; default: x += 1; } } {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ isn‘t a type, so it can’t be used in an ‘as’ expression.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the name following the as in a cast expression is defined to be something other than a type.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x is a variable, not a type:
{% prettify dart %} num x = 0; int y = x as [!x!]; {% endprettify %}
Replace the name with the name of a type:
{% prettify dart %} num x = 0; int y = x as int; {% endprettify %}
‘{0}’ must have a method body because ‘{1}’ isn't abstract.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a member of a concrete class is found that doesn‘t have a concrete implementation. Concrete classes aren’t allowed to contain abstract members.
The following code produces this diagnostic because m is an abstract method but C isn't an abstract class:
{% prettify dart %} class C { [!void m();!] } {% endprettify %}
If it's valid to create instances of the class, provide an implementation for the member:
{% prettify dart %} class C { void m() {} } {% endprettify %}
If it isn't valid to create instances of the class, mark the class as being abstract:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class C { void m(); } {% endprettify %}
Can't define a const constructor for a class with non-final fields.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a constructor is marked as a const constructor, but the constructor is defined in a class that has at least one non-final instance field (either directly or by inheritance).
The following code produces this diagnostic because the field x isn't final:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
const !C!; } {% endprettify %}
If it's possible to mark all of the fields as final, then do so:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final int x;
const C(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
If it isn't possible to mark all of the fields as final, then remove the keyword const from the constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
C(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
Const variables must be initialized with a constant value.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a value that isn‘t statically known to be a constant is assigned to a variable that’s declared to be a ‘const’ variable.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x isn't declared to be const:
{% prettify dart %} var x = 0; const y = [!x!]; {% endprettify %}
If the value being assigned can be declared to be const, then change the declaration:
{% prettify dart %} const x = 0; const y = x; {% endprettify %}
If the value can't be declared to be const, then remove the const modifier from the variable, possibly using final in its place:
{% prettify dart %} var x = 0; final y = x; {% endprettify %}
Only static fields can be declared as const.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an instance field is marked as being const.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f is an instance field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { [!const!] int f = 3; } {% endprettify %}
If the field needs to be an instance field, then remove the keyword const, or replace it with final:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final int f = 3; } {% endprettify %}
If the field really should be a const field, then make it a static field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static const int f = 3; } {% endprettify %}
The constant ‘{0}’ must be initialized.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a variable that is declared to be a constant doesn't have an initializer.
The following code produces this diagnostic because c isn't initialized:
{% prettify dart %} const [!c!]; {% endprettify %}
Add an initializer:
{% prettify dart %} const c = ‘c’; {% endprettify %}
A list or a set is expected in this spread.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the expression of a spread operator in a constant list or set evaluates to something other than a list or a set.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the value of list1 is null, which is neither a list nor a set:
{% prettify dart %} const List list1 = null; const List list2 = [...[!list1!]]; {% endprettify %}
Change the expression to something that evaluates to either a constant list or a constant set:
{% prettify dart %} const List list1 = []; const List list2 = [...list1]; {% endprettify %}
A map is expected in this spread.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the expression of a spread operator in a constant map evaluates to something other than a map.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the value of map1 is null, which isn't a map:
{% prettify dart %} const Map<String, int> map1 = null; const Map<String, int> map2 = {...[!map1!]}; {% endprettify %}
Change the expression to something that evaluates to a constant map:
{% prettify dart %} const Map<String, int> map1 = {}; const Map<String, int> map2 = {...map1}; {% endprettify %}
The constructor being called isn't a const constructor.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the keyword const is used to invoke a constructor that isn't marked with const.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the constructor in A isn't a const constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A(); }
A f() => [!const!] A(); {% endprettify %}
If it's desirable and possible to make the class a constant class (by making all of the fields of the class, including inherited fields, final), then add the keyword const to the constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class A { const A(); }
A f() => const A(); {% endprettify %}
Otherwise, remove the keyword const:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A(); }
A f() => A(); {% endprettify %}
Arguments of a constant creation must be constant expressions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a const constructor is invoked with an argument that isn't a constant expression.
The following code produces this diagnostic because i isn't a constant:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final int i; const C(this.i); } C f(int i) => const C([!i!]); {% endprettify %}
Either make all of the arguments constant expressions, or remove the const keyword to use the non-constant form of the constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final int i; const C(this.i); } C f(int i) => C(i); {% endprettify %}
Dead code.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when code is found that won't be executed because execution will never reach the code.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the invocation of print occurs after the function has returned:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { return; [!print(‘here’);!] } {% endprettify %}
If the code isn't needed, then remove it:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { return; } {% endprettify %}
If the code needs to be executed, then either move the code to a place where it will be executed:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { print(‘here’); return; } {% endprettify %}
Or, rewrite the code before it, so that it can be reached:
{% prettify dart %} void f({bool skipPrinting = true}) { if (skipPrinting) { return; } print(‘here’); } {% endprettify %}
Dead code: Catch clauses after a ‘catch (e)’ or an ‘on Object catch (e)’ are never reached.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a catch clause is found that can't be executed because it’s after a catch clause of the form catch (e) or on Object catch (e). The first catch clause that matches the thrown object is selected, and both of those forms will match any object, so no catch clauses that follow them will be selected.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { } catch (e) { } [!on String { }!] } {% endprettify %}
If the clause should be selectable, then move the clause before the general clause:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { } on String { } catch (e) { } } {% endprettify %}
If the clause doesn't need to be selectable, then remove it:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { } catch (e) { } } {% endprettify %}
Dead code: This on-catch block won’t be executed because ‘{0}’ is a subtype of ‘{1}’ and hence will have been caught already.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a catch clause is found that can‘t be executed because it is after a catch clause that catches either the same type or a supertype of the clause’s type. The first catch clause that matches the thrown object is selected, and the earlier clause l always matches anything matchable by the highlighted clause, so the highlighted clause will never be selected.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { } on num { } [!on int { }!] } {% endprettify %}
If the clause should be selectable, then move the clause before the general clause:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { } on int { } on num { } } {% endprettify %}
If the clause doesn't need to be selectable, then remove it:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { } on num { } } {% endprettify %}
‘{0}’ is deprecated and shouldn't be used.
‘{0}’ is deprecated and shouldn't be used. {1}.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a deprecated library or class member is used in a different package.
If the method m in the class C is annotated with @deprecated, then the following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} void f(C c) { c.!m!; } {% endprettify %}
The documentation for declarations that are annotated with @deprecated should indicate what code to use in place of the deprecated code.
‘{0}’ is deprecated and shouldn't be used.
‘{0}’ is deprecated and shouldn't be used. {1}.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a deprecated library member or class member is used in the same package in which it's declared.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x is deprecated:
{% prettify dart %} @deprecated var x = 0; var y = [!x!]; {% endprettify %}
The fix depends on what's been deprecated and what the replacement is. The documentation for deprecated declarations should indicate what code to use in place of the deprecated code.
The constructor with name ‘{0}’ is already defined.
The default constructor is already defined.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a class declares more than one unnamed constructor or when it declares more than one constructor with the same name.
The following code produces this diagnostic because there are two declarations for the unnamed constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class C { C();
!C!; } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because there are two declarations for the constructor named m:
{% prettify dart %} class C { C.m();
!C.m!; } {% endprettify %}
If there are multiple unnamed constructors and all of the constructors are needed, then give all of them, or all except one of them, a name:
{% prettify dart %} class C { C();
C.n(); } {% endprettify %}
If there are multiple unnamed constructors and all except one of them are unneeded, then remove the constructors that aren't needed:
{% prettify dart %} class C { C(); } {% endprettify %}
If there are multiple named constructors and all of the constructors are needed, then rename all except one of them:
{% prettify dart %} class C { C.m();
C.n(); } {% endprettify %}
If there are multiple named constructors and all except one of them are unneeded, then remove the constructorsthat aren't needed:
{% prettify dart %} class C { C.m(); } {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ is already defined.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a name is declared, and there is a previous declaration with the same name in the same scope.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the name x is declared twice:
{% prettify dart %} int x = 0; int [!x!] = 1; {% endprettify %}
Choose a different name for one of the declarations.
{% prettify dart %} int x = 0; int y = 1; {% endprettify %}
Duplicate import.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an import directive is found that is the same as an import before it in the file. The second import doesn’t add value and should be removed.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’; import [!‘package:meta/meta.dart’!];
@sealed class C {} {% endprettify %}
Remove the unnecessary import:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
@sealed class C {} {% endprettify %}
The argument for the named parameter ‘{0}’ was already specified.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an invocation has two or more named arguments that have the same name.
The following code produces this diagnostic because there are two arguments with the name a:
{% prettify dart %} void f(C c) { c.m(a: 0, [!a!]: 1); }
class C { void m({int a, int b}) {} } {% endprettify %}
If one of the arguments should have a different name, then change the name:
{% prettify dart %} void f(C c) { c.m(a: 0, b: 1); }
class C { void m({int a, int b}) {} } {% endprettify %}
If one of the arguments is wrong, then remove it:
{% prettify dart %} void f(C c) { c.m(a: 1); }
class C { void m({int a, int b}) {} } {% endprettify %}
Two values in a constant set can't be equal.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when two elements in a constant set literal have the same value. The set can only contain each value once, which means that one of the values is unnecessary.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the string 'a' is specified twice:
{% prettify dart %} const Set set = {‘a’, [!‘a’!]}; {% endprettify %}
Remove one of the duplicate values:
{% prettify dart %} const Set set = {‘a’}; {% endprettify %}
Note that literal sets preserve the order of their elements, so the choice of which element to remove might affect the order in which elements are returned by an iterator.
Two keys in a constant map literal can't be equal.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a key in a constant map is the same as a previous key in the same map. If two keys are the same, then the second value would overwrite the first value, which makes having both pairs pointless.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the key 1 is used twice:
{% prettify dart %} const map = <int, String>{1: ‘a’, 2: ‘b’, [!1!]: ‘c’, 4: ‘d’}; {% endprettify %}
If both entries should be included in the map, then change one of the keys to be different:
{% prettify dart %} const map = <int, String>{1: ‘a’, 2: ‘b’, 3: ‘c’, 4: ‘d’}; {% endprettify %}
If only one of the entries is needed, then remove the one that isn't needed:
{% prettify dart %} const map = <int, String>{1: ‘a’, 2: ‘b’, 4: ‘d’}; {% endprettify %}
Note that literal maps preserve the order of their entries, so the choice of which entry to remove might affect the order in which keys and values are returned by an iterator.
Expressions can't be used in a map literal.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the analyzer finds an expression, rather than a map entry, in what appears to be a map literal.
The following code generates this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} var map = <String, int>{‘a’: 0, ‘b’: 1, [!‘c’!]}; {% endprettify %}
If the expression is intended to compute either a key or a value in an entry, fix the issue by replacing the expression with the key or the value. For example:
{% prettify dart %} var map = <String, int>{‘a’: 0, ‘b’: 1, ‘c’: 2}; {% endprettify %}
Classes can only extend other classes.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extends clause contains a name that is declared to be something other than a class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f is declared to be a function:
{% prettify dart %} void f() {}
class C extends [!f!] {} {% endprettify %}
If you want the class to extend a class other than Object, then replace the name in the extends clause with the name of that class:
{% prettify dart %} void f() {}
class C extends B {}
class B {} {% endprettify %}
If you want the class to extend Object, then remove the extends clause:
{% prettify dart %} void f() {}
class C {} {% endprettify %}
Extension ‘{0}’ can't be used as an expression.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the name of an extension is used in an expression other than in an extension override or to qualify an access to a static member of the extension. Because classes define a type, the name of a class can be used to refer to the instance of Type representing the type of the class. Extensions, on the other hand, don‘t define a type and can’t be used as a type literal.
The following code produces this diagnostic because E is an extension:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on int { static String m() => ''; }
var x = [!E!]; {% endprettify %}
Replace the name of the extension with a name that can be referenced, such as a static member defined on the extension:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on int { static String m() => ''; }
var x = E.m(); {% endprettify %}
Extension ‘{0}’ can't define static member ‘{1}’ and an instance member with the same name.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension declaration contains both an instance member and a static member that have the same name. The instance member and the static member can‘t have the same name because it’s unclear which member is being referenced by an unqualified use of the name within the body of the extension.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the name a is being used for two different members:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on Object { int get a => 0; static int !a! => 0; } {% endprettify %}
Rename or remove one of the members:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on Object { int get a => 0; static int b() => 0; } {% endprettify %}
Extensions can't declare abstract members.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an abstract declaration is declared in an extension. Extensions can declare only concrete members.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the method a doesn't have a body:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { int !a!; } {% endprettify %}
Either provide an implementation for the member or remove it.
Extensions can't declare constructors.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a constructor declaration is found in an extension. It isn‘t valid to define a constructor because extensions aren’t classes, and it isn't possible to create an instance of an extension.
The following code produces this diagnostic because there is a constructor declaration in E:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { !E! : super(); } {% endprettify %}
Remove the constructor or replace it with a static method.
Extensions can't declare instance fields
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an instance field declaration is found in an extension. It isn't valid to define an instance field because extensions can only add behavior, not state.
The following code produces this diagnostic because s is an instance field:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String [!s!]; } {% endprettify %}
Remove the field, make it a static field, or convert it to be a getter, setter, or method.
Extensions can't declare members with the same name as a member declared by ‘Object’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension declaration declares a member with the same name as a member declared in the class Object. Such a member can never be used because the member in Object is always found first.
The following code produces this diagnostic because toString is defined by Object:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String !toString! => this; } {% endprettify %}
Remove the member or rename it so that the name doesn't conflict with the member in Object:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String displayString() => this; } {% endprettify %}
An extension override can't be used to access a static member from an extension.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override is the target of the invocation of a static member. Similar to static members in classes, the static members of an extension should be accessed using the name of the extension, not an extension override.
The following code produces this diagnostic because m is static:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { static void m() {} }
void f() { E('').!m!; } {% endprettify %}
Replace the extension override with the name of the extension:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { static void m() {} }
void f() { E.m(); } {% endprettify %}
The type of the argument to the extension override ‘{0}’ isn't assignable to the extended type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the argument to an extension override isn't assignable to the type being extended by the extension.
The following code produces this diagnostic because 3 isn't a String:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { void method() {} }
void f() { E([!3!]).method(); } {% endprettify %}
If you're using the correct extension, then update the argument to have the correct type:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { void method() {} }
void f() { E(3.toString()).method(); } {% endprettify %}
If there‘s a different extension that’s valid for the type of the argument, then either replace the name of the extension or unwrap the target so that the correct extension is found.
An extension override can only be used to access instance members.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override is found that isn‘t being used to access one of the members of the extension. The extension override syntax doesn’t have any runtime semantics; it only controls which member is selected at compile time.
The following code produces this diagnostic because E(i) isn't an expression:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on int { int get a => 0; }
void f(int i) { print([!E(i)!]); } {% endprettify %}
If you want to invoke one of the members of the extension, then add the invocation:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on int { int get a => 0; }
void f(int i) { print(E(i).a); } {% endprettify %}
If you don't want to invoke a member, then unwrap the target:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on int { int get a => 0; }
void f(int i) { print(i); } {% endprettify %}
Extension overrides have no value so they can't be used as the target of a cascade expression.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override is used as the target of a cascade expression. The value of a cascade expression e..m is the value of the target e, but extension overrides are not expressions and don't have a value.
The following code produces this diagnostic because E(3) isn't an expression:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on int { void m() {} } f() { E(3)[!..!]m(); } {% endprettify %}
Use ‘.’ rather than ‘..’:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on int { void m() {} } f() { E(3).m(); } {% endprettify %}
If there are multiple cascaded accesses, you'll need to duplicate the extension override for each one.
Too many positional arguments: {0} expected, but {1} found.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a method or function invocation has more positional arguments than the method or function allows.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f defines 2 parameters but is invoked with 3 arguments:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int a, int b) {} void g() { f[!(1, 2, 3)!]; } {% endprettify %}
Remove the arguments that don't correspond to parameters:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int a, int b) {} void g() { f(1, 2); } {% endprettify %}
Too many positional arguments: {0} expected, but {1} found.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a method or function invocation has more positional arguments than the method or function allows, but the method or function defines named parameters.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f defines 2 positional parameters but has a named parameter that could be used for the third argument:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int a, int b, {int c}) {} void g() { f[!(1, 2, 3)!]; } {% endprettify %}
If some of the arguments should be values for named parameters, then add the names before the arguments:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int a, int b, {int c}) {} void g() { f(1, 2, c: 3); } {% endprettify %}
Otherwise, remove the arguments that don't correspond to positional parameters:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int a, int b, {int c}) {} void g() { f(1, 2); } {% endprettify %}
The final variable ‘{0}’ must be initialized.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a final field or variable isn't initialized.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x doesn't have an initializer:
{% prettify dart %} final [!x!]; {% endprettify %}
For variables and static fields, you can add an initializer:
{% prettify dart %} final x = 0; {% endprettify %}
For instance fields, you can add an initializer as shown in the previous example, or you can initialize the field in every constructor. You can initialize the field by using a field formal parameter:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final int x; C(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
You can also initialize the field by using an initializer in the constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final int x; C(int y) : x = y * 2; } {% endprettify %}
All final variables must be initialized, but ‘{0}’ and ‘{1}’ are not.
All final variables must be initialized, but ‘{0}’ is not.
All final variables must be initialized, but ‘{0}’, ‘{1}’, and {2} others are not.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a class defines one or more final instance fields without initializers and has at least one constructor that doesn‘t initialize those fields. All final instance fields must be initialized when the instance is created, either by the field’s initializer or by the constructor.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final String value;
!C!; } {% endprettify %}
If the value should be passed in to the constructor directly, then use a field formal parameter to initialize the field value:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final String value;
C(this.value); } {% endprettify %}
If the value should be computed indirectly from a value provided by the caller, then add a parameter and include an initializer:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final String value;
C(Object o) : value = o.toString(); } {% endprettify %}
If the value of the field doesn't depend on values that can be passed to the constructor, then add an initializer for the field as part of the field declaration:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final String value = '';
C(); } {% endprettify %}
If the value of the field doesn't depend on values that can be passed to the constructor but different constructors need to initialize it to different values, then add an initializer for the field in the initializer list:
{% prettify dart %} class C { final String value;
C() : value = '';
C.named() : value = ‘c’; } {% endprettify %}
However, if the value is the same for all instances, then consider using a static field instead of an instance field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static const String value = '';
C(); } {% endprettify %}
The type ‘{0}’ used in the ‘for’ loop must implement {1}.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the expression following in in a for-in loop has a type that isn't a subclass of Iterable.
The following code produces this diagnostic because m is a Map, and Map isn't a subclass of Iterable:
{% prettify dart %} void f(Map<String, String> m) { for (String s in [!m!]) { print(s); } } {% endprettify %}
Replace the expression with one that produces an iterable value:
{% prettify dart %} void f(Map<String, String> m) { for (String s in m.values) { print(s); } } {% endprettify %}
Classes and mixins can only implement other classes and mixins.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a name used in the implements clause of a class or mixin declaration is defined to be something other than a class or mixin.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x is a variable rather than a class or mixin:
{% prettify dart %} var x; class C implements [!x!] {} {% endprettify %}
If the name is the name of an existing class or mixin that‘s already being imported, then add a prefix to the import so that the local definition of the name doesn’t shadow the imported name.
If the name is the name of an existing class or mixin that isn't being imported, then add an import, with a prefix, for the library in which it’s declared.
Otherwise, either replace the name in the implements clause with the name of an existing class or mixin, or remove the name from the implements clause.
‘{0}’ can only be implemented once.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a single class is specified more than once in an implements clause.
The following code produces this diagnostic because A is in the list twice:
{% prettify dart %} class A {} class B implements A, [!A!] {} {% endprettify %}
Remove all except one occurrence of the class name:
{% prettify dart %} class A {} class B implements A {} {% endprettify %}
Only static members can be accessed in initializers.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it finds a reference to an instance member in a constructor's initializer list.
The following code produces this diagnostic because defaultX is an instance member:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
C() : x = [!defaultX!];
int get defaultX => 0; } {% endprettify %}
If the member can be made static, then do so:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
C() : x = defaultX;
static int get defaultX => 0; } {% endprettify %}
If not, then replace the reference in the initializer with a different expression that doesn't use an instance member:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
C() : x = 0;
int get defaultX => 0; } {% endprettify %}
‘{0}’ isn't a field in the enclosing class.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a constructor initializes a field that isn‘t declared in the class containing the constructor. Constructors can’t initialize fields that aren't declared and fields that are inherited from superclasses.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the initializer is initializing x, but x isn't a field in the class:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int y;
C() : [!x = 0!]; } {% endprettify %}
If a different field should be initialized, then change the name to the name of the field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int y;
C() : y = 0; } {% endprettify %}
If the field must be declared, then add a declaration:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x; int y;
C() : x = 0; } {% endprettify %}
‘{0}’ isn't a field in the enclosing class.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a field formal parameter is found in a constructor in a class that doesn‘t declare the field being initialized. Constructors can’t initialize fields that aren't declared and fields that are inherited from superclasses.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the field x isn't defined:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int y;
C([!this.x!]); } {% endprettify %}
If the field name was wrong, then change it to the name of an existing field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int y;
C(this.y); } {% endprettify %}
If the field name is correct but hasn't yet been defined, then declare the field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x; int y;
C(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
If the parameter is needed but shouldn't initialize a field, then convert it to a normal parameter and use it:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int y;
C(int x) : y = x * 2; } {% endprettify %}
If the parameter isn't needed, then remove it:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int y;
C(); } {% endprettify %}
Static {1} ‘{0}’ can't be accessed through an instance.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an access operator is used to access a static member through an instance of the class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because zero is a static field, but it’s being accessed as if it were an instance field:
{% prettify dart %} void f(C c) { c.[!zero!]; }
class C { static int zero = 0; } {% endprettify %}
Use the class to access the static member:
{% prettify dart %} void f(C c) { C.zero; }
class C { static int zero = 0; } {% endprettify %}
Instance members can't be accessed from a factory constructor.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a factory constructor contains an unqualified reference to an instance member. In a generative constructor, the instance of the class is created and initialized before the body of the constructor is executed, so the instance can be bound to this and accessed just like it would be in an instance method. But, in a factory constructor, the instance isn‘t created before executing the body, so this can’t be used to reference it.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x isn't in scope in the factory constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x; factory C() { return C.([!x!]); } C.(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
Rewrite the code so that it doesn't reference the instance member:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x; factory C() { return C.(0); } C.(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
Instance members can't be accessed from a static method.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a static method contains an unqualified reference to an instance member.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the instance field x is being referenced in a static method:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
static int m() { return [!x!]; } } {% endprettify %}
If the method must reference the instance member, then it can't be static, so remove the keyword:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
int m() { return x; } } {% endprettify %}
If the method can't be made an instance method, then add a parameter so that an instance of the class can be passed in:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
static int m(C c) { return c.x; } } {% endprettify %}
Abstract classes can't be instantiated.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it finds a constructor invocation and the constructor is declared in an abstract class. Even though you can't create an instance of an abstract class, abstract classes can declare constructors that can be invoked by subclasses.
The following code produces this diagnostic because C is an abstract class:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class C {}
var c = new !C!; {% endprettify %}
If there's a concrete subclass of the abstract class that can be used, then create an instance of the concrete subclass.
A value of type ‘{0}’ can't be assigned to a variable of type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the static type of an expression that is assigned to a variable isn't assignable to the type of the variable.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the type of the initializer (int) isn't assignable to the type of the variable (String):
{% prettify dart %} int i = 0; String s = [!i!]; {% endprettify %}
If the value being assigned is always assignable at runtime, even though the static types don't reflect that, then add an explicit cast.
Otherwise, change the value being assigned so that it has the expected type. In the previous example, this might look like:
{% prettify dart %} int i = 0; String s = i.toString(); {% endprettify %}
If you can’t change the value, then change the type of the variable to be compatible with the type of the value being assigned:
{% prettify dart %} int i = 0; int s = i; {% endprettify %}
Extension overrides must have exactly one argument: the value of ‘this’ in the extension method.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override doesn't have exactly one argument. The argument is the expression used to compute the value of this within the extension method, so there must be one argument.
The following code produces this diagnostic because there are no arguments:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String join(String other) => ‘$this $other’; }
void f() { E[!()!].join(‘b’); } {% endprettify %}
And, the following code produces this diagnostic because there's more than one argument:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String join(String other) => ‘$this $other’; }
void f() { E[!(‘a’, ‘b’)!].join(‘c’); } {% endprettify %}
Provide one argument for the extension override:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String join(String other) => ‘$this $other’; }
void f() { E(‘a’).join(‘b’); } {% endprettify %}
The name of a factory constructor must be the same as the name of the immediately enclosing class.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the name of a factory constructor isn't the same as the name of the surrounding class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the name of the factory constructor (A) isn't the same as the surrounding class (C):
{% prettify dart %} class A {}
class C { factory !A! => null; } {% endprettify %}
If the factory returns an instance of the surrounding class, then rename the factory:
{% prettify dart %} class A {}
class C { factory C() => null; } {% endprettify %}
If the factory returns an instance of a different class, then move the factory to that class:
{% prettify dart %} class A { factory A() => null; }
class C {} {% endprettify %}
If the factory returns an instance of a different class, but you can‘t modify that class or don’t want to move the factory, then convert it to be a static method:
{% prettify dart %} class A {}
class C { static A a() => null; } {% endprettify %}
Only const constructors can have the @literal annotation.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the @literal annotation is applied to anything other than a const constructor.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the constructor is not a const constructor:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
class C { [!@literal!] C(); } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because x isn't a constructor:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
[!@literal!] var x; {% endprettify %}
If the annotation is on a constructor and the constructor should always be invoked with const, when possible, then mark the constructor with the const keyword:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
class C { @literal const C(); } {% endprettify %}
If the constructor can't be marked as const, then remove the annotation.
If the annotation is on anything other than a constructor, then remove the annotation:
{% prettify dart %} var x; {% endprettify %}
‘{1}.{0}’ (‘{2}’) isn‘t a valid override of ‘{3}.{0}’ (’{4}').
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a member of a class is found that overrides a member from a supertype and the override isn't valid. An override is valid if all of these are true:
The following code produces this diagnostic because the type of the parameter s (String) isn't assignable to the type of the parameter i (int):
{% prettify dart %} class A { void m(int i) {} }
class B extends A { void [!m!](String s) {} } {% endprettify %}
If the invalid method is intended to override the method from the superclass, then change it to conform:
{% prettify dart %} class A { void m(int i) {} }
class B extends A { void m(int i) {} } {% endprettify %}
If it isn't intended to override the method from the superclass, then rename it:
{% prettify dart %} class A { void m(int i) {} }
class B extends A { void m2(String s) {} } {% endprettify %}
Invalid reference to ‘this’ expression.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when this is used outside of an instance method or a generative constructor. The reserved word this is only defined in the context of an instance method or a generative constructor.
The following code produces this diagnostic because v is a top-level variable:
{% prettify dart %} C f() => [!this!];
class C {} {% endprettify %}
Use a variable of the appropriate type in place of this, declaring it if necessary:
{% prettify dart %} C f(C c) => c;
class C {} {% endprettify %}
Invalid URI syntax: ‘{0}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a URI in a directive doesn't conform to the syntax of a valid URI.
The following code produces this diagnostic because '#' isn't a valid URI:
{% prettify dart %} import [!‘#’!]; {% endprettify %}
Replace the invalid URI with a valid URI.
Can't have modifier ‘#lexeme’ in an extension.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a member declared inside an extension uses the keyword covariant in the declaration of a parameter. Extensions aren‘t classes and don’t have subclasses, so the keyword serves no purpose.
The following code produces this diagnostic because i is marked as being covariant:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { void a([!covariant!] int i) {} } {% endprettify %}
Remove the ‘covariant’ keyword:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { void a(int i) {} } {% endprettify %}
The member ‘{0}’ is annotated with ‘{1}’, but this annotation is only meaningful on declarations of public members.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when either the @visibleForTemplate or @visibleForTesting annotation is applied to a non-public declaration.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
[!@visibleForTesting!] void _someFunction() {}
void f() => _someFunction(); {% endprettify %}
If the declaration doesn't need to be used by test code, then remove the annotation:
{% prettify dart %} void _someFunction() {}
void f() => _someFunction(); {% endprettify %}
If it does, then make it public:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
@visibleForTesting void someFunction() {}
void f() => someFunction(); {% endprettify %}
The extension ‘{0}’ doesn‘t define a ‘call’ method so the override can’t be used in an invocation.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override is used to invoke a function but the extension doesn't declare a call method.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the extension E doesn't define a call method:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String {}
void f() { !E('')!; } {% endprettify %}
If the extension is intended to define a call method, then declare it:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { int call() => 0; }
void f() { E('')(); } {% endprettify %}
If the extended type defines a call method, then remove the extension override.
If the call method isn‘t defined, then rewrite the code so that it doesn’t invoke the call method.
‘{0}’ isn't a function.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it finds a function invocation, but the name of the function being invoked is defined to be something other than a function.
The following code produces this diagnostic because Binary is the name of a function type, not a function:
{% prettify dart %} typedef Binary = int Function(int, int);
int f() { return [!Binary!](1, 2); } {% endprettify %}
Replace the name with the name of a function.
The expression doesn‘t evaluate to a function, so it can’t be invoked.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a function invocation is found, but the name being referenced isn‘t the name of a function, or when the expression computing the function doesn’t compute a function.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x isn't a function:
{% prettify dart %} int x = 0;
int f() => x;
var y = !x!; {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because f() doesn't return a function:
{% prettify dart %} int x = 0;
int f() => x;
var y = !f()!; {% endprettify %}
If you need to invoke a function, then replace the code before the argument list with the name of a function or with an expression that computes a function:
{% prettify dart %} int x = 0;
int f() => x;
var y = f(); {% endprettify %}
The element type ‘{0}’ can't be assigned to the list type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the type of an element in a list literal isn't assignable to the element type of the list.
The following code produces this diagnostic because 2.5 is a double, and the list can hold only integers:
{% prettify dart %} List x = [1, [!2.5!], 3]; {% endprettify %}
If you intended to add a different object to the list, then replace the element with an expression that computes the intended object:
{% prettify dart %} List x = [1, 2, 3]; {% endprettify %}
If the object shouldn't be in the list, then remove the element:
{% prettify dart %} List x = [1, 3]; {% endprettify %}
If the object being computed is correct, then widen the element type of the list to allow all of the different types of objects it needs to contain:
{% prettify dart %} List x = [1, 2.5, 3]; {% endprettify %}
Map entries can only be used in a map literal.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a map entry (a key/value pair) is found in a set literal.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the literal has a map entry even though it's a set literal:
{% prettify dart %} const collection = {[!‘a’ : ‘b’!]}; {% endprettify %}
If you intended for the collection to be a map, then change the code so that it is a map. In the previous example, you could do this by adding another type argument:
{% prettify dart %} const collection = <String, String>{‘a’ : ‘b’}; {% endprettify %}
In other cases, you might need to change the explicit type from Set to Map.
If you intended for the collection to be a set, then remove the map entry, possibly by replacing the colon with a comma if both values should be included in the set:
{% prettify dart %} const collection = {‘a’, ‘b’}; {% endprettify %}
The element type ‘{0}’ can't be assigned to the map key type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a key of a key-value pair in a map literal has a type that isn't assignable to the key type of the map.
The following code produces this diagnostic because 2 is an int, but the keys of the map are required to be Strings:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <String, String>{[!2!] : ‘a’}; {% endprettify %}
If the type of the map is correct, then change the key to have the correct type:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <String, String>{‘2’ : ‘a’}; {% endprettify %}
If the type of the key is correct, then change the key type of the map:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <int, String>{2 : ‘a’}; {% endprettify %}
The element type ‘{0}’ can't be assigned to the map value type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a value of a key-value pair in a map literal has a type that isn't assignable to the the value type of the map.
The following code produces this diagnostic because 2 is an int, but/ the values of the map are required to be Strings:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <String, String>{‘a’ : [!2!]}; {% endprettify %}
If the type of the map is correct, then change the value to have the correct type:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <String, String>{‘a’ : ‘2’}; {% endprettify %}
If the type of the value is correct, then change the value type of the map:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <String, int>{‘a’ : 2}; {% endprettify %}
Missing case clause for ‘{0}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a switch statement for an enum doesn't include an option for one of the values in the enumeration.
Note that null is always a possible value for an enum and therefore also must be handled.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the enum constant e2 isn't handled:
{% prettify dart %} enum E { e1, e2 }
void f(E e) { [!switch (e)!] { case E.e1: break; } } {% endprettify %}
If there's special handling for the missing values, then add a case clause for each of the missing values:
{% prettify dart %} enum E { e1, e2 }
void f(E e) { switch (e) { case E.e1: break; case E.e2: break; } } {% endprettify %}
If the missing values should be handled the same way, then add a default clause:
{% prettify dart %} enum E { e1, e2 }
void f(E e) { switch (e) { case E.e1: break; default: break; } } {% endprettify %}
The parameter ‘{0}’ is required.
The parameter ‘{0}’ is required. {1}.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a method or function with a named parameter that is annotated as being required is invoked without providing a value for the parameter.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the named parameter x is required:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
void f({@required int x}) {}
void g() { !f!; } {% endprettify %}
Provide the required value:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
void f({@required int x}) {}
void g() { f(x: 2); } {% endprettify %}
This function has a return type of ‘{0}’, but doesn't end with a return statement.
Any function or method that doesn't end with either an explicit return or a throw implicitly returns null. This is rarely the desired behavior. The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it finds an implicit return.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f doesn't end with a return:
{% prettify dart %} int [!f!](int x) { if (x < 0) { return 0; } } {% endprettify %}
Add a return statement that makes the return value explicit, even if null is the appropriate value.
Classes can only mix in mixins and classes.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a name in a mixin clause is defined to be something other than a mixin or a class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because F is defined to be a function type:
{% prettify dart %} typedef F = int Function(String);
class C with [!F!] {} {% endprettify %}
Remove the invalid name from the list, possibly replacing it with the name of the intended mixin or class:
{% prettify dart %} typedef F = int Function(String);
class C {} {% endprettify %}
The class ‘{0}’ shouldn't be used as a mixin constraint because it is sealed, and any class mixing in this mixin must have ‘{0}’ as a superclass.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the superclass constraint of a mixin is a class from a different package that was marked as @sealed. Classes that are sealed can't be extended, implemented, mixed in, or used as a superclass constraint.
If the package ‘p’ defines a sealed class:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
@sealed class C {} {% endprettify %}
Then, the following code, when in a package other than ‘p’, produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:p/p.dart’;
[!mixin M on C {}!] {% endprettify %}
If the classes that use the mixin don't need to be subclasses of the sealed class, then consider adding a field and delegating to the wrapped instance of the sealed class.
Only classes and mixins can be used as superclass constraints.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a type following the on keyword in a mixin declaration is neither a class nor a mixin.
The following code produces this diagnostic because F is neither a class nor a mixin:
{% prettify dart %} typedef F = void Function();
mixin M on [!F!] {} {% endprettify %}
If the type was intended to be a class but was mistyped, then replace the name.
Otherwise, remove the type from the on clause.
This class (or a class that this class inherits from) is marked as ‘@immutable’, but one or more of its instance fields aren't final: {0}
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an immutable class defines one or more instance fields that aren‘t final. A class is immutable if it’s marked as being immutable using the annotation @immutable or if it's a subclass of an immutable class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the field x isn't final:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
@immutable class [!C!] { int x;
C(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
If instances of the class should be immutable, then add the keyword final to all non-final field declarations:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
@immutable class C { final int x;
C(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
If the instances of the class should be mutable, then remove the
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x;
C(this.x); } {% endprettify %}
This method overrides a method annotated as ‘@mustCallSuper’ in ‘{0}’, but doesn't invoke the overridden method.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a method that overrides a method that is annotated as @mustCallSuper doesn't invoke the overridden method as required.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the method m in B doesn't invoke the overridden method m in A:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
class A { @mustCallSuper m() {} }
class B extends A { @override !m! {} } {% endprettify %}
Add an invocation of the overridden method in the overriding method:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
class A { @mustCallSuper m() {} }
class B extends A { @override m() { super.m(); } } {% endprettify %}
The class ‘{0}’ doesn't have a default constructor.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an unnamed constructor is invoked on a class that defines named constructors but the class doesn’t have an unnamed constructor.
The following code produces this diagnostic because A doesn't define an unnamed constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A.a(); }
A f() => !A!; {% endprettify %}
If one of the named constructors does what you need, then use it:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A.a(); }
A f() => A.a(); {% endprettify %}
If none of the named constructors does what you need, and you're able to add an unnamed constructor, then add the constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A(); A.a(); }
A f() => A(); {% endprettify %}
Missing concrete implementation of ‘{0}’.
Missing concrete implementations of ‘{0}’ and ‘{1}’.
Missing concrete implementations of ‘{0}’, ‘{1}’, ‘{2}’, ‘{3}’, and {4} more.
Missing concrete implementations of ‘{0}’, ‘{1}’, ‘{2}’, and ‘{3}’.
Missing concrete implementations of ‘{0}’, ‘{1}’, and ‘{2}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a concrete class inherits one or more abstract members, and doesn't provide or inherit an implementation for at least one of those abstract members.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the class B doesn't have a concrete implementation of m:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { void m(); }
class [!B!] extends A {} {% endprettify %}
If the subclass can provide a concrete implementation for some or all of the abstract inherited members, then add the concrete implementations:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { void m(); }
class B extends A { void m() {} } {% endprettify %}
If there is a mixin that provides an implementation of the inherited methods, then apply the mixin to the subclass:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { void m(); }
class B extends A with M {}
mixin M { void m() {} } {% endprettify %}
If the subclass can't provide a concrete implementation for all of the abstract inherited members, then mark the subclass as being abstract:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { void m(); }
abstract class B extends A {} {% endprettify %}
Conditions must have a static type of ‘bool’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a condition, such as an if or while loop, doesn't have the static type bool.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x has the static type int:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int x) { if ([!x!]) { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
Change the condition so that it produces a Boolean value:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int x) { if (x == 0) { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
The expression in an assert must be of type ‘bool’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the first expression in an assert has a type other than bool.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the type of p is int, but a bool is required:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int p) { assert([!p!]); } {% endprettify %}
Change the expression so that it has the type bool:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int p) { assert(p > 0); } {% endprettify %}
A negation operand must have a static type of ‘bool’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the operand of the unary negation operator (!) doesn't have the type bool.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x is an int when it must be a bool:
{% prettify dart %} int x = 0; bool y = ![!x!]; {% endprettify %}
Replace the operand with an expression that has the type bool:
{% prettify dart %} int x = 0; bool y = !(x > 0); {% endprettify %}
The operands of the operator ‘{0}’ must be assignable to ‘bool’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when one of the operands of either the && or || operator doesn't have the type bool.
The following code produces this diagnostic because a isn't a Boolean value:
{% prettify dart %} int a = 3; bool b = [!a!] || a > 1; {% endprettify %}
Change the operand to a Boolean value:
{% prettify dart %} int a = 3; bool b = a == 0 || a > 1; {% endprettify %}
Case expressions must be constant.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the expression in a case clause isn't a constant expression.
The following code produces this diagnostic because j isn't a constant:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int i, int j) { switch (i) { case [!j!]: // ... break; } } {% endprettify %}
Either make the expression a constant expression, or rewrite the switch statement as a sequence of if statements:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int i, int j) { if (i == j) { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
The default value of an optional parameter must be constant.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an optional parameter, either named or positional, has a default value that isn't a compile-time constant.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} var defaultValue = 3;
void f([int value = [!defaultValue!]]) {} {% endprettify %}
If the default value can be converted to be a constant, then convert it:
{% prettify dart %} const defaultValue = 3;
void f([int value = defaultValue]) {} {% endprettify %}
If the default value needs to change over time, then apply the default value inside the function:
{% prettify dart %} var defaultValue = 3;
void f([int value]) { value ??= defaultValue; } {% endprettify %}
The values in a const list literal must be constants.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an element in a constant list literal isn‘t a constant value. The list literal can be constant either explicitly (because it’s prefixed by the const keyword) or implicitly (because it appears in a constant context).
The following code produces this diagnostic because x isn't a constant, even though it appears in an implicitly constant list literal:
{% prettify dart %} var x = 2; var y = const [0, 1, [!x!]]; {% endprettify %}
If the list needs to be a constant list, then convert the element to be a constant. In the example above, you might add the const keyword to the declaration of x:
{% prettify dart %} const x = 2; var y = const [0, 1, x]; {% endprettify %}
If the expression can‘t be made a constant, then the list can’t be a constant either, so you must change the code so that the list isn't a constant. In the example above this means removing the const keyword before the list literal:
{% prettify dart %} var x = 2; var y = [0, 1, x]; {% endprettify %}
The elements in a const map literal must be constant.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an if element or a spread element in a constant map isn't a constant element.
The following code produces this diagnostic because it is attempting to spread a non-constant map:
{% prettify dart %} var notConst = <int, int>{}; var map = const <int, int>{...[!notConst!]}; {% endprettify %}
Similarly, the following code produces this diagnostic because the condition in the if element isn't a constant expression:
{% prettify dart %} bool notConst = true; var map = const <int, int>{if ([!notConst!]) 1 : 2}; {% endprettify %}
If the map needs to be a constant map, then make the elements constants. In the spread example, you might do that by making the collection being spread a constant:
{% prettify dart %} const notConst = <int, int>{}; var map = const <int, int>{...notConst}; {% endprettify %}
If the map doesn't need to be a constant map, then remove the const keyword:
{% prettify dart %} bool notConst = true; var map = <int, int>{if (notConst) 1 : 2}; {% endprettify %}
The keys in a const map literal must be constant.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a key in a constant map literal isn't a constant value.
The following code produces this diagnostic beause a isn't a constant:
{% prettify dart %} var a = ‘a’; var m = const {[!a!]: 0}; {% endprettify %}
If the map needs to be a constant map, then make the key a constant:
{% prettify dart %} const a = ‘a’; var m = const {a: 0}; {% endprettify %}
If the map doesn't need to be a constant map, then remove the const keyword:
{% prettify dart %} var a = ‘a’; var m = {a: 0}; {% endprettify %}
The values in a const map literal must be constant.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a value in a constant map literal isn't a constant value.
The following code produces this diagnostic because a isn't a constant:
{% prettify dart %} var a = ‘a’; var m = const {0: [!a!]}; {% endprettify %}
If the map needs to be a constant map, then make the key a constant:
{% prettify dart %} const a = ‘a’; var m = const {0: a}; {% endprettify %}
If the map doesn't need to be a constant map, then remove the const keyword:
{% prettify dart %} var a = ‘a’; var m = {0: a}; {% endprettify %}
The values in a const set literal must be constants.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a constant set literal contains an element that isn't a compile-time constant.
The following code produces this diagnostic because i isn't a constant:
{% prettify dart %} var i = 0;
var s = const {[!i!]}; {% endprettify %}
If the element can be changed to be a constant, then change it:
{% prettify dart %} const i = 0;
var s = const {i}; {% endprettify %}
If the element can't be a constant, then remove the keyword const:
{% prettify dart %} var i = 0;
var s = {i}; {% endprettify %}
This instance creation must be ‘const’, because the {0} constructor is marked as ‘@literal’.
This instance creation must be ‘const’, because the {0} constructor is marked as ‘@literal’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a constructor that has the @literal annotation is invoked without using the const keyword, but all of the arguments to the constructor are constants. The annotation indicates that the constructor should be used to create a constant value whenever possible.
The following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
class C { @literal const C(); }
C f() => [!C()!]; {% endprettify %}
Add the keyword const before the constructor invocation:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘package:meta/meta.dart’;
class C { @literal const C(); }
void f() => const C(); {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ isn‘t a type so it can’t be used as a type argument.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an identifier that isn't a type is used as a type argument.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x is a variable, not a type:
{% prettify dart %} var x = 0; List<[!x!]> xList = []; {% endprettify %}
Change the type argument to be a type:
{% prettify dart %} var x = 0; List xList = []; {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ isn‘t a type and can’t be used in an on-catch clause.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the identifier following the on in a catch clause is defined to be something other than a type.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f is a function, not a type:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { // ... } on [!f!] { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
Change the name to the type of object that should be caught:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { // ... } on FormatException { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
{0} isn't a type.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a name is used as a type but declared to be something other than a type.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f is a function:
{% prettify dart %} f() {} g([!f!] v) {} {% endprettify %}
Replace the name with the name of a type.
{0} positional argument(s) expected, but {1} found.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a method or function invocation has fewer positional arguments than the number of required positional parameters.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f declares two required parameters, but only one argument is provided:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int a, int b) {} void g() { f[!(0)!]; } {% endprettify %}
Add arguments corresponding to the remaining parameters:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int a, int b) {} void g() { f(0, 1); } {% endprettify %}
Spread elements in list or set literals must implement ‘Iterable’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the static type of the expression of a spread element that appears in either a list literal or a set literal doesn't implement the type Iterable.
The following code generates this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <String, int>{‘a’: 0, ‘b’: 1}; var s = {...[!m!]}; {% endprettify %}
The most common fix is to replace the expression with one that produces an iterable object:
{% prettify dart %} var m = <String, int>{‘a’: 0, ‘b’: 1}; var s = {...m.keys}; {% endprettify %}
Spread elements in map literals must implement ‘Map’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the static type of the expression of a spread element that appears in a map literal doesn't implement the type Map.
The following code produces this diagnostic because l isn't a Map:
{% prettify dart %} var l = [‘a’, ‘b’]; var m = <int, String>{...[!l!]}; {% endprettify %}
The most common fix is to replace the expression with one that produces a map:
{% prettify dart %} var l = [‘a’, ‘b’]; var m = <int, String>{...l.asMap()}; {% endprettify %}
Annotation creation must have arguments.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an annotation consists of a single identifier, but that identifier is the name of a class rather than a variable. To create an instance of the class, the identifier must be followed by an argument list.
The following code produces this diagnostic because C is a class, and a class can't be used as an annotation without invoking a const constructor from the class:
{% prettify dart %} class C { const C(); }
[!@C!] var x; {% endprettify %}
Add the missing argument list:
{% prettify dart %} class C { const C(); }
@C() var x; {% endprettify %}
The field doesn't override an inherited getter or setter.
The getter doesn't override an inherited getter.
The method doesn't override an inherited method.
The setter doesn't override an inherited setter.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a class member is annotated with the @override annotation, but the member isn’t declared in any of the supertypes of the class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because m isn't declared in any of the supertypes of C:
{% prettify dart %} class C { @override String !m! => ''; } {% endprettify %}
If the member is intended to override a member with a different name, then update the member to have the same name:
{% prettify dart %} class C { @override String toString() => ''; } {% endprettify %}
If the member is intended to override a member that was removed from the superclass, then consider removing the member from the subclass.
If the member can't be removed, then remove the annotation.
The included part ‘{0}’ must have a part-of directive.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a part directive is found and the referenced file doesn't have a part-of directive.
Given a file (a.dart) containing:
{% prettify dart %} class A {} {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because a.dart doesn't contain a part-of directive:
{% prettify dart %} part [!‘a.dart’!]; {% endprettify %}
If the referenced file is intended to be a part of another library, then add a part-of directive to the file:
{% prettify dart %} part of ‘test.dart’;
class A {} {% endprettify %}
If the referenced file is intended to be a library, then replace the part directive with an import directive:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘a.dart’; {% endprettify %}
The redirected constructor ‘{0}’ has incompatible parameters with ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a factory constructor attempts to redirect to another constructor, but the two have incompatible parameters. The parameters are compatible if all of the parameters of the redirecting constructor can be passed to the other constructor and if the other constructor doesn‘t require any parameters that aren’t declared by the redirecting constructor.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the constructor for A doesn't declare a parameter that the constructor for B requires:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { factory A() = [!B!]; }
class B implements A { B(int x); B.zero(); } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because the constructor for A declares a named parameter (y) that the constructor for B doesn't allow:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { factory A(int x, {int y}) = [!B!]; }
class B implements A { B(int x); } {% endprettify %}
If there's a different constructor that is compatible with the redirecting constructor, then redirect to that constructor:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { factory A() = B.zero; }
class B implements A { B(int x); B.zero(); } {% endprettify %}
Otherwise, update the redirecting constructor to be compatible:
{% prettify dart %} abstract class A { factory A(int x) = B; }
class B implements A { B(int x); } {% endprettify %}
The return type ‘{0}’ of the redirected constructor isn't assignable to ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a factory constructor redirects to a constructor whose return type isn't a subtype of the type that the factory constructor is declared to produce.
The following code produces this diagnostic because A isn‘t a subclass of C, which means that the value returned by the constructor A() couldn’t be returned from the constructor C():
{% prettify dart %} class A {}
class B implements C {}
class C { factory C() = [!A!]; } {% endprettify %}
If the factory constructor is redirecting to a constructor in the wrong class, then update the factory constructor to redirect to the correct constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class A {}
class B implements C {}
class C { factory C() = B; } {% endprettify %}
If the class defining the constructor being redirected to is the class that should be returned, then make it a subtype of the factory's return type:
{% prettify dart %} class A implements C {}
class B implements C {}
class C { factory C() = A; } {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ isn‘t a type and can’t be used in a redirected constructor.
One way to implement a factory constructor is to redirect to another constructor by referencing the name of the constructor. The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the redirect is to something other than a constructor.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f is a function:
{% prettify dart %} C f() => null;
class C { factory C() = [!f!]; } {% endprettify %}
If the constructor isn't defined, then either define it or replace it with a constructor that is defined.
If the constructor is defined but the class that defines it isn't visible, then you probably need to add an import.
If you‘re trying to return the value returned by a function, then rewrite the constructor to return the value from the constructor’s body:
{% prettify dart %} C f() => null;
class C { factory C() => f(); } {% endprettify %}
Local variable ‘{0}’ can't be referenced before it is declared.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a variable is referenced before it’s declared. In Dart, variables are visible everywhere in the block in which they are declared, but can only be referenced after they are declared.
The analyzer also produces a context message that indicates where the declaration is located.
The following code produces this diagnostic because i is used before it is declared:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { print([!i!]); int i = 5; } {% endprettify %}
If you intended to reference the local variable, move the declaration before the first reference:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { int i = 5; print(i); } {% endprettify %}
If you intended to reference a name from an outer scope, such as a parameter, instance field or top-level variable, then rename the local declaration so that it doesn't hide the outer variable.
{% prettify dart %} void f(int i) { print(i); int x = 5; print(x); } {% endprettify %}
A value of type ‘{0}’ can't be returned from function ‘{2}’ because it has a return type of ‘{1}’.
A value of type ‘{0}’ can't be returned from method ‘{2}’ because it has a return type of ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a method or function returns a value whose type isn't assignable to the declared return type.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f has a return type of String but is returning an int:
{% prettify dart %} String f() => [!3!]; {% endprettify %}
If the return type is correct, then replace the value being returned with a value of the correct type, possibly by converting the existing value:
{% prettify dart %} String f() => 3.toString(); {% endprettify %}
If the value is correct, then change the return type to match:
{% prettify dart %} int f() => 3; {% endprettify %}
The return type ‘{0}’ isn‘t a ‘{1}’, as required by the closure’s context.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the static type of a returned expression isn't assignable to the return type that the closure is required to have.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f is defined to be a function that returns a String, but the closure assigned to it returns an int:
{% prettify dart %} String Function(String) f = (s) => [!3!]; {% endprettify %}
If the return type is correct, then replace the returned value with a value of the correct type, possibly by converting the existing value:
{% prettify dart %} String Function(String) f = (s) => 3.toString(); {% endprettify %}
The return value is missing after ‘return’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it finds a return statement without an expression in a function that declares a return type.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the function f is expected to return an int, but no value is being returned:
{% prettify dart %} int f() { [!return!]; } {% endprettify %}
Add an expression that computes the value to be returned:
{% prettify dart %} int f() { return 0; } {% endprettify %}
The class ‘{0}’ wasn't exported from ‘dart:core’ until version 2.1, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when either the class Future or Stream is referenced in a library that doesn‘t import dart:async in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.1.0. In earlier versions, these classes weren’t defined in dart:core, so the import was necessary.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.1.0:
environment: sdk: '>=2.0.0 <2.4.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} void f([!Future!] f) {} {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the classes to be referenced:
environment: sdk: '>=2.1.0 <2.4.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then import the dart:async library.
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:async’;
void f(Future f) {} {% endprettify %}
The use of an as expression in a constant expression wasn't supported until version 2.3.2, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an as expression inside a constant context is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.3.2. Using an as expression in a constant context wasn‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.3.2:
environment: sdk: '>=2.1.0 <2.4.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following generates this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} const num n = 3; const int i = [!n as int!]; {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the expression to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.3.2 <2.4.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then either rewrite the code to not use an as expression, or change the code so that the as expression is not in a constant context.:
{% prettify dart %} num x = 3; int y = x as int; {% endprettify %}
The use of the operator ‘{0}’ for ‘bool’ operands in a constant context wasn't supported until version 2.3.2, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when any use of the &, | or ^ operators on the class bool inside a constant context is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.3.2. Using these operators in a constant context wasn‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.3.2:
environment: sdk: '>=2.1.0 <2.4.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} const bool a = true; const bool b = false; const bool c = a [!&!] b; {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the operators to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.3.2 <2.4.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then either rewrite the code to not use these operators, or change the code so that the expression is not in a constant context.:
{% prettify dart %} const bool a = true; const bool b = false; bool c = a & b; {% endprettify %}
Using the operator ‘==’ for non-primitive types wasn't supported until version 2.3.2, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the operator == is used on a non-primitive type inside a constant context is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.3.2. Using this operator in a constant context wasn‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.3.2:
environment: sdk: '>=2.1.0 <2.4.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} class C {} const C a = null; const C b = null; const bool same = a [!==!] b; {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the operator to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.3.2 <2.4.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then either rewrite the code to not use the == operator, or change the code so that the expression is not in a constant context.:
{% prettify dart %} class C {} const C a = null; const C b = null; bool same = a == b; {% endprettify %}
Extension methods weren't supported until version 2.6.0, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension declaration or an extension override is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.6.0. Using extensions wasn‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.6.0:
environment: sdk: '>=2.4.0 <2.7.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following generates this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} [!extension!] E on String { void sayHello() { print(‘Hello $this’); } } {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the syntax to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.6.0 <2.7.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then rewrite the code to not make use of extensions. The most common way to do this is to rewrite the members of the extension as top-level functions (or methods) that take the value that would have been bound to this as a parameter:
{% prettify dart %} void sayHello(String s) { print(‘Hello $s’); } {% endprettify %}
The use of an is expression in a constant context wasn't supported until version 2.3.2, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an is expression inside a constant context is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.3.2. Using an is expression in a constant context wasn‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.3.2:
environment: sdk: '>=2.1.0 <2.4.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following generates this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} const x = 4; const y = [!x is int!] ? 0 : 1; {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the expression to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.3.2 <2.4.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then either rewrite the code to not use the is operator, or, if that's not possible, change the code so that the is expression is not in a constant context.:
{% prettify dart %} const x = 4; var y = x is int ? 0 : 1; {% endprettify %}
Set literals weren't supported until version 2.2, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a set literal is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.2.0. Set literals weren‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.2.0:
environment: sdk: '>=2.1.0 <2.4.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} var s = [!{}!]; {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the syntax to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.2.0 <2.4.0'
If you do need to support older versions of the SDK, then replace the set literal with code that creates the set without the use of a literal:
{% prettify dart %} var s = new Set(); {% endprettify %}
The for, if, and spread elements weren't supported until version 2.3.0, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a for, if, or spread element is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.3.0. Using a for, if, or spread element wasn‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.3.0:
environment: sdk: '>=2.2.0 <2.4.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following generates this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} var digits = [[!for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) i!]]; {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the syntax to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.3.0 <2.4.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then rewrite the code to not make use of those elements:
{% prettify dart %} var digits = _initializeDigits();
List _initializeDigits() { var digits = []; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { digits.add(i); } return digits; } {% endprettify %}
The if and spread elements weren't supported in constant expressions until version 2.5.0, but this code is required to be able to run on earlier versions.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an if or spread element inside a constant context is found in code that has an SDK constraint whose lower bound is less than 2.5.0. Using an if or spread element inside a constant context wasn‘t supported in earlier versions, so this code won’t be able to run against earlier versions of the SDK.
Here's an example of a pubspec that defines an SDK constraint with a lower bound of less than 2.5.0:
environment: sdk: '>=2.4.0 <2.6.0'
In the package that has that pubspec, code like the following generates this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} const a = [1, 2]; const b = [[!...a!]]; {% endprettify %}
If you don't need to support older versions of the SDK, then you can increase the SDK constraint to allow the syntax to be used:
environment: sdk: '>=2.5.0 <2.6.0'
If you need to support older versions of the SDK, then rewrite the code to not make use of those elements:
{% prettify dart %} const a = [1, 2]; const b = [1, 2]; {% endprettify %}
If that's not possible, change the code so that the element is not in a constant context.:
{% prettify dart %} const a = [1, 2]; var b = [...a]; {% endprettify %}
Instance member ‘{0}’ can't be accessed using static access.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a class name is used to access an instance field. Instance fields don't exist on a class; they exist only on an instance of the class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because x is an instance field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static int a;
int b; }
int f() => C.[!b!]; {% endprettify %}
If you intend to access a static field, then change the name of the field to an existing static field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static int a;
int b; }
int f() => C.a; {% endprettify %}
If you intend to access the instance field, then use an instance of the class to access the field:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static int a;
int b; }
int f(C c) => c.b; {% endprettify %}
The ‘super’ keyword can‘t be used in an extension because an extension doesn’t have a superclass.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a member declared inside an extension uses the super keyword . Extensions aren‘t classes and don’t have superclasses, so the super keyword serves no purpose.
The following code produces this diagnostic because super can't be used in an extension:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on Object { String get displayString => [!super!].toString(); } {% endprettify %}
Remove the super keyword :
{% prettify dart %} extension E on Object { String get displayString => toString(); } {% endprettify %}
Invalid context for ‘super’ invocation.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the keyword super is used outside of a instance method.
The following code produces this diagnostic because super is used in a top-level function:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { [!super!].f(); } {% endprettify %}
Rewrite the code to not use super.
‘{0}’ doesn't extend ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a type argument isn't the same as or a subclass of the bounds of the corresponding type parameter.
The following code produces this diagnostic because String isn't a subclass of num:
{% prettify dart %} class A {}
var a = A<[!String!]>(); {% endprettify %}
Change the type argument to be a subclass of the bounds:
{% prettify dart %} class A {}
var a = A(); {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ isn‘t defined, so it can’t be used in an ‘is’ expression.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the name following the is in a type test expression isn't defined.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the name Srting isn't defined:
{% prettify dart %} void f(Object o) { if (o is [!Srting!]) { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
Replace the name with the name of a type:
{% prettify dart %} void f(Object o) { if (o is String) { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
Undefined name ‘{0}’ used as an annotation.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a name that isn't defined is used as an annotation.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the name undefined isn't defined:
{% prettify dart %} [!@undefined!] void f() {} {% endprettify %}
If the name is correct, but it isn’t declared yet, then declare the name as a constant value:
{% prettify dart %} const undefined = ‘undefined’;
@undefined void f() {} {% endprettify %}
If the name is wrong, replace the name with the name of a valid constant:
{% prettify dart %} @deprecated void f() {} {% endprettify %}
Otherwise, remove the annotation.
Undefined class ‘{0}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it encounters an identifier that appears to be the name of a class but either isn‘t defined or isn’t visible in the scope in which it's being referenced.
The following code produces this diagnostic because Piont isn't defined:
{% prettify dart %} class Point {}
void f([!Piont!] p) {} {% endprettify %}
If the identifier isn't defined, then either define it or replace it with the name of a class that is defined. The example above can be corrected by fixing the spelling of the class:
{% prettify dart %} class Point {}
void f(Point p) {} {% endprettify %}
If the class is defined but isn't visible, then you probably need to add an import.
The class ‘{0}’ doesn't have a constructor named ‘{1}’.
The class ‘{0}’ doesn't have an unnamed constructor.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a superclass constructor is invoked in the initializer list of a constructor, but the superclass doesn't define the constructor being invoked.
The following code produces this diagnostic because A doesn't have an unnamed constructor:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A.n(); } class B extends A { B() : [!super()!]; } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because A doesn't have a constructor named m:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A.n(); } class B extends A { B() : [!super.m()!]; } {% endprettify %}
If the superclass defines a constructor that should be invoked, then change the constructor being invoked:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A.n(); } class B extends A { B() : super.n(); } {% endprettify %}
If the superclass doesn't define an appropriate constructor, then define the constructor being invoked:
{% prettify dart %} class A { A.m(); A.n(); } class B extends A { B() : super.m(); } {% endprettify %}
The getter ‘{0}’ isn't defined for the extension ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override is used to invoke a getter, but the getter isn‘t defined by the specified extension. The analyzer also produces this diagnostic when a static getter is referenced but isn’t defined by the specified extension.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the extension E doesn't declare an instance getter named b:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String get a => ‘a’; }
extension F on String { String get b => ‘b’; }
void f() { E(‘c’).[!b!]; } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because the extension E doesn't declare a static getter named a:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String {}
var x = E.[!a!]; {% endprettify %}
If the name of the getter is incorrect, then change it to the name of an existing getter:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String get a => ‘a’; }
extension F on String { String get b => ‘b’; }
void f() { E(‘c’).a; } {% endprettify %}
If the name of the getter is correct but the name of the extension is wrong, then change the name of the extension to the correct name:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String get a => ‘a’; }
extension F on String { String get b => ‘b’; }
void f() { F(‘c’).b; } {% endprettify %}
If the name of the getter and extension are both correct, but the getter isn't defined, then define the getter:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String get a => ‘a’; String get b => ‘z’; }
extension F on String { String get b => ‘b’; }
void f() { E(‘c’).b; } {% endprettify %}
The method ‘{0}’ isn't defined for the extension ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override is used to invoke a method, but the method isn‘t defined by the specified extension. The analyzer also produces this diagnostic when a static method is referenced but isn’t defined by the specified extension.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the extension E doesn't declare an instance method named b:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String a() => ‘a’; }
extension F on String { String b() => ‘b’; }
void f() { E(‘c’).!b!; } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because the extension E doesn't declare a static method named a:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String {}
var x = E.!a!; {% endprettify %}
If the name of the method is incorrect, then change it to the name of an existing method:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String a() => ‘a’; }
extension F on String { String b() => ‘b’; }
void f() { E(‘c’).a(); } {% endprettify %}
If the name of the method is correct, but the name of the extension is wrong, then change the name of the extension to the correct name:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String a() => ‘a’; }
extension F on String { String b() => ‘b’; }
void f() { F(‘c’).b(); } {% endprettify %}
If the name of the method and extension are both correct, but the method isn't defined, then define the method:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { String a() => ‘a’; String b() => ‘z’; }
extension F on String { String b() => ‘b’; }
void f() { E(‘c’).b(); } {% endprettify %}
The setter ‘{0}’ isn't defined for the extension ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an extension override is used to invoke a setter, but the setter isn‘t defined by the specified extension. The analyzer also produces this diagnostic when a static setter is referenced but isn’t defined by the specified extension.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the extension E doesn't declare an instance setter named b:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { set a(String v) {} }
extension F on String { set b(String v) {} }
void f() { E(‘c’).[!b!] = ‘d’; } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because the extension E doesn't declare a static setter named a:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String {}
void f() { E.[!a!] = 3; } {% endprettify %}
If the name of the setter is incorrect, then change it to the name of an existing setter:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { set a(String v) {} }
extension F on String { set b(String v) {} }
void f() { E(‘c’).a = ‘d’; } {% endprettify %}
If the name of the setter is correct, but the name of the extension is wrong, then change the name of the extension to the correct name:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { set a(String v) {} }
extension F on String { set b(String v) {} }
void f() { F(‘c’).b = ‘d’; } {% endprettify %}
If the name of the setter and extension are both correct, but the setter isn't defined, then define the setter:
{% prettify dart %} extension E on String { set a(String v) {} set b(String v) {} }
extension F on String { set b(String v) {} }
void f() { E(‘c’).b = ‘d’; } {% endprettify %}
The function ‘{0}’ isn't defined.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it encounters an identifier that appears to be the name of a function but either isn‘t defined or isn’t visible in the scope in which it's being referenced.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the name emty isn't defined:
{% prettify dart %} List empty() => [];
void main() { print(!emty!); } {% endprettify %}
If the identifier isn't defined, then either define it or replace it with the name of a function that is defined. The example above can be corrected by fixing the spelling of the function:
{% prettify dart %} List empty() => [];
void main() { print(empty()); } {% endprettify %}
If the function is defined but isn't visible, then you probably need to add an import or re-arrange your code to make the function visible.
The getter ‘{0}’ isn't defined for the type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it encounters an identifier that appears to be the name of a getter but either isn‘t defined or isn’t visible in the scope in which it's being referenced.
The following code produces this diagnostic because String has no member named len:
{% prettify dart %} int f(String s) => s.[!len!]; {% endprettify %}
If the identifier isn't defined, then either define it or replace it with the name of a getter that is defined. The example above can be corrected by fixing the spelling of the getter:
{% prettify dart %} int f(String s) => s.length; {% endprettify %}
The library ‘{0}’ doesn't export a member with the hidden name ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a hide combinator includes a name that isn't defined by the library being imported.
The following code produces this diagnostic because dart:math doesn't define the name String:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:math’ hide [!String!], max;
var x = min(0, 1); {% endprettify %}
If a different name should be hidden, then correct the name. Otherwise, remove the name from the list:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:math’ hide max;
var x = min(0, 1); {% endprettify %}
Undefined name ‘{0}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it encounters an identifier that either isn‘t defined or isn’t visible in the scope in which it's being referenced.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the name rihgt isn't defined:
{% prettify dart %} int min(int left, int right) => left <= [!rihgt!] ? left : right; {% endprettify %}
If the identifier isn't defined, then either define it or replace it with an identifier that is defined. The example above can be corrected by fixing the spelling of the variable:
{% prettify dart %} int min(int left, int right) => left <= right ? left : right; {% endprettify %}
If the identifier is defined but isn't visible, then you probably need to add an import or re-arrange your code to make the identifier visible.
The method ‘{0}’ isn't defined for the type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it encounters an identifier that appears to be the name of a method but either isn‘t defined or isn’t visible in the scope in which it's being referenced.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the identifier removeMiddle isn't defined:
{% prettify dart %} int f(List l) => l.!removeMiddle!; {% endprettify %}
If the identifier isn't defined, then either define it or replace it with the name of a method that is defined. The example above can be corrected by fixing the spelling of the method:
{% prettify dart %} int f(List l) => l.removeLast(); {% endprettify %}
The named parameter ‘{0}’ isn't defined.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a method or function invocation has a named argument, but the method or function being invoked doesn't define a parameter with the same name.
The following code produces this diagnostic because m doesn't declare a named parameter named a:
{% prettify dart %} class C { m({int b}) {} }
void f(C c) { c.m([!a!]: 1); } {% endprettify %}
If the argument name is mistyped, then replace it with the correct name. The example above can be fixed by changing a to b:
{% prettify dart %} class C { m({int b}) {} }
void f(C c) { c.m(b: 1); } {% endprettify %}
If a subclass adds a parameter with the name in question, then cast the target to the subclass:
{% prettify dart %} class C { m({int b}) {} }
class D extends C { m({int a, int b}) {} }
void f(C c) { (c as D).m(a: 1); } {% endprettify %}
If the parameter should be added to the function, then add it:
{% prettify dart %} class C { m({int a, int b}) {} }
void f(C c) { c.m(a: 1); } {% endprettify %}
The operator ‘{0}’ isn't defined for the type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a user-definable operator is invoked on an object for which the operator isn't defined.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the class C doesn't define the operator +:
{% prettify dart %} class C {}
C f(C c) => c [!+!] 2; {% endprettify %}
If the operator should be defined for the class, then define it:
{% prettify dart %} class C { C operator +(int i) => this; }
C f(C c) => c + 2; {% endprettify %}
The name ‘{0}’ is being referenced through the prefix ‘{1}’, but it isn't defined in any of the libraries imported using that prefix.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a prefixed identifier is found where the prefix is valid, but the identifier isn't declared in any of the libraries imported using that prefix.
The following code produces this diagnostic because dart:core doesn't define anything named a:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:core’ as p;
void f() { p.[!a!]; } {% endprettify %}
If the library in which the name is declared isn't imported yet, add an import for the library.
If the name is wrong, then change it to one of the names that's declared in the imported libraries.
The setter ‘{0}’ isn't defined for the type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it encounters an identifier that appears to be the name of a setter but either isn‘t defined or isn’t visible in the scope in which the identifier is being referenced.
The following code produces this diagnostic because there isn't a setter named z:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x = 0; void m(int y) { this.[!z!] = y; } } {% endprettify %}
If the identifier isn't defined, then either define it or replace it with the name of a setter that is defined. The example above can be corrected by fixing the spelling of the setter:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int x = 0; void m(int y) { this.x = y; } } {% endprettify %}
The library ‘{0}’ doesn't export a member with the shown name ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a show combinator includes a name that isn't defined by the library being imported.
The following code produces this diagnostic because dart:math doesn't define the name String:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:math’ show min, [!String!];
var x = min(0, 1); {% endprettify %}
If a different name should be shown, then correct the name. Otherwise, remove the name from the list:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:math’ show min;
var x = min(0, 1); {% endprettify %}
The method ‘{0}’ isn't defined in a superclass of ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an inherited method is referenced using super, but there’s no method with that name in the superclass chain.
The following code produces this diagnostic because Object doesn't define a member named n:
{% prettify dart %} class C { void m() { super.!n!; } } {% endprettify %}
If the inherited method you intend to invoke has a different name, then make the name of the invoked method match the inherited method.
If the method you intend to invoke is defined in the same class, then remove the super..
If not, then either add the method to one of the superclasses or remove the invocation.
Unnecessary cast.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the value being cast is already known to be of the type that it's being cast to.
The following code produces this diagnostic because n is already known to be an int as a result of the is test:
{% prettify dart %} void f(num n) { if (n is int) { ([!n as int!]).isEven; } } {% endprettify %}
Remove the unnecessary cast:
{% prettify dart %} void f(num n) { if (n is int) { n.isEven; } } {% endprettify %}
Static members from the extended type or one of its superclasses must be qualified by the name of the defining type.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an undefined name is found, and the name is the same as a static member of the extended type or one of its superclasses.
The following code produces this diagnostic because m is a static member of the extended type C:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static void m() {} }
extension E on C { void f() { !m!; } } {% endprettify %}
If you‘re trying to reference a static member that’s declared outside the extension, then add the name of the class or extension before the reference to the member:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static void m() {} }
extension E on C { void f() { C.m(); } } {% endprettify %}
If you‘re referencing a member that isn’t declared yet, add a declaration:
{% prettify dart %} class C { static void m() {} }
extension E on C { void f() { m(); }
void m() {} } {% endprettify %}
The exception variable ‘{0}’ isn't used, so the ‘catch’ clause can be removed.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a catch clause is found, and neither the exception parameter nor the optional stack trace parameter are used in the catch block.
The following code produces this diagnostic because e isn't referenced:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { int.parse(‘;’); } on FormatException catch ([!e!]) { // ignored } } {% endprettify %}
Remove the unused catch clause:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { int.parse(‘;’); } on FormatException { // ignored } } {% endprettify %}
The stack trace variable ‘{0}’ isn't used and can be removed.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the stack trace parameter in a catch clause isn't referenced within the body of the catch block.
The following code produces this diagnostic because stackTrace isn't referenced:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { // ... } catch (exception, [!stackTrace!]) { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
If you need to reference the stack trace parameter, then add a reference to it. Otherwise, remove it:
{% prettify dart %} void f() { try { // ... } catch (exception) { // ... } } {% endprettify %}
The declaration ‘{0}’ isn't referenced.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a private class, enum, mixin, typedef, top level variable, top level function, or method is declared but never referenced.
Assuming that no code in the library references _C, the following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} class [!_C!] {} {% endprettify %}
If the declaration isn't needed, then remove it.
If the declaration was intended to be used, then add the missing code.
The value of the field ‘{0}’ isn't used.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a private field is declared but never read, even if it's written in one or more places.
The following code produces this diagnostic because _x isn't referenced anywhere in the library:
{% prettify dart %} class Point { int [!_x!]; } {% endprettify %}
If the field isn't needed, then remove it.
If the field was intended to be used, then add the missing code.
Unused import: ‘{0}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an import isn't needed because none of the names that are imported are referenced within the importing library.
The following code produces this diagnostic because nothing defined in dart:async is referenced in the library:
{% prettify dart %} import [!‘dart:async’!];
void main() {} {% endprettify %}
If the import isn't needed, then remove it.
If some of the imported names are intended to be used, then add the missing code.
The label ‘{0}’ isn't used.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a label that isn't used is found.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the label loop isn't referenced anywhere in the method:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int limit) { [!loop:!] for (int i = 0; i < limit; i++) { print(i); } } {% endprettify %}
If the label isn't needed, then remove it:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int limit) { for (int i = 0; i < limit; i++) { print(i); } } {% endprettify %}
If the label is needed, then use it:
{% prettify dart %} void f(int limit) { loop: for (int i = 0; i < limit; i++) { print(i); break loop; } } {% endprettify %}
The value of the local variable ‘{0}’ isn't used.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a local variable is declared but never read, even if it's written in one or more places.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the value of count is never read:
{% prettify dart %} void main() { int [!count!] = 0; } {% endprettify %}
If the variable isn't needed, then remove it.
If the variable was intended to be used, then add the missing code.
The name {0} is shown, but isn’t used.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a show combinator includes a name that isn‘t used within the library. Because it isn’t referenced, the name can be removed.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the function max isn't used:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:math’ show min, [!max!];
var x = min(0, 1); {% endprettify %}
Either use the name or remove it:
{% prettify dart %} import ‘dart:math’ show min;
var x = min(0, 1); {% endprettify %}
Target of URI doesn't exist: ‘{0}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an import, export, or part directive is found where the URI refers to a file that doesn't exist.
If the file lib.dart doesn't exist, the following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} import [!‘lib.dart’!]; {% endprettify %}
If the URI was mistyped or invalid, then correct the URI.
If the URI is correct, then create the file.
Target of URI hasn't been generated: ‘{0}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when an import, export, or part directive is found where the URI refers to a file that doesn‘t exist and the name of the file ends with a pattern that’s commonly produced by code generators, such as one of the following:
.g.dart.pb.dart.pbenum.dart.pbserver.dart.pbjson.dart.template.dartIf the file lib.g.dart doesn't exist, the following code produces this diagnostic:
{% prettify dart %} import [!‘lib.g.dart’!]; {% endprettify %}
If the file is a generated file, then run the generator that generates the file.
If the file isn't a generated file, then check the spelling of the URI or create the file.
This expression has a type of ‘void’ so its value can't be used.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when it finds an expression whose type is void, and the expression is used in a place where a value is expected, such as before a member access or on the right-hand side of an assignment.
The following code produces this diagnostic because f doesn't produce an object on which toString can be invoked:
{% prettify dart %} void f() {}
void g() { [!f()!].toString(); } {% endprettify %}
Either rewrite the code so that the expression has a value or rewrite the code so that it doesn't depend on the value.
A value of type ‘{0}’ can't be assigned to a variable of type ‘{1}’.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when the evaluation of a constant expression would result in a CastException.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the value of x is an int, which can‘t be assigned to y because an int isn’t a String:
{% prettify dart %} const Object x = 0; const String y = [!x!]; {% endprettify %}
If the declaration of the constant is correct, then change the value being assigned to be of the correct type:
{% prettify dart %} const Object x = 0; const String y = ‘$x’; {% endprettify %}
If the assigned value is correct, then change the declaration to have the correct type:
{% prettify dart %} const Object x = 0; const int y = x; {% endprettify %}
Operator ‘{0}’ should declare exactly {1} parameters, but {2} found.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a declaration of an operator has the wrong number of parameters.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the operator + must have a single parameter corresponding to the right operand:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int operator [!+!](a, b) => 0; } {% endprettify %}
Add or remove parameters to match the required number:
{% prettify dart %} class C { int operator +(a) => 0; } {% endprettify %}
Setters must declare exactly one required positional parameter.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a setter is found that doesn't declare exactly one required positional parameter.
The following code produces this diagnostic because the setter s declares two required parameters:
{% prettify dart %} class C { set [!s!](int x, int y) {} } {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because the setter s declares one optional parameter:
{% prettify dart %} class C { set [!s!]([int x]) {} } {% endprettify %}
Change the declaration so that there's exactly one required positional parameter:
{% prettify dart %} class C { set s(int x) {} } {% endprettify %}
The type ‘{0}’ is declared with {1} type parameters, but {2} type arguments were given.
The analyzer produces this diagnostic when a type that has type parameters is used and type arguments are provided, but the number of type arguments isn't the same as the number of type parameters.
The analyzer also produces this diagnostic when a constructor is invoked and the number of type arguments doesn't match the number of type parameters declared for the class.
The following code produces this diagnostic because C has one type parameter but two type arguments are provided when it is used as a type annotation:
{% prettify dart %} class C {}
void f([!C<int, int>!] x) {} {% endprettify %}
The following code produces this diagnostic because C declares one type parameter, but two type arguments are provided when creating an instance:
{% prettify dart %} class C {}
var c = !C<int, int>!; {% endprettify %}
Add or remove type arguments, as necessary, to match the number of type parameters defined for the type:
{% prettify dart %} class C {}
void f(C x) {} {% endprettify %}