|
| 1 | +# Icon System Refactoring: Meeting Summary |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +## Previous Approach (Extension-Based) |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +### How It Worked |
| 6 | +```dart |
| 7 | +// 1. Icon parsing was scattered across extensions |
| 8 | +class FletExtension { |
| 9 | + IconData? createIconData(int iconCode) { return null; } |
| 10 | +} |
| 11 | +
|
| 12 | +// 2. Core extension implemented icon logic |
| 13 | +class FletCoreExtension extends FletExtension { |
| 14 | + @override |
| 15 | + IconData? createIconData(int iconCode) { |
| 16 | + int setId = (iconCode >> 16) & 0xFF; |
| 17 | + int iconIndex = iconCode & 0xFFFF; |
| 18 | +
|
| 19 | + if (setId == 1) return materialIcons[iconIndex]; |
| 20 | + if (setId == 2) return cupertinoIcons[iconIndex]; |
| 21 | + return null; |
| 22 | + } |
| 23 | +} |
| 24 | +
|
| 25 | +// 3. Icon parsing required backend parameter |
| 26 | +IconData? parseIconData(int? value, FletBackend backend, [IconData? defaultValue]) { |
| 27 | + for (var extension in backend.extensions) { |
| 28 | + var iconData = extension.createIconData(value); |
| 29 | + if (iconData != null) return iconData; |
| 30 | + } |
| 31 | + return null; |
| 32 | +} |
| 33 | +``` |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +### Problems with Previous Approach |
| 36 | + |
| 37 | +1. **❌ Poor Separation of Concerns** |
| 38 | + - `FletExtension` was cluttered with icon logic |
| 39 | + - Extensions should focus on widgets/services, not icon data |
| 40 | + |
| 41 | +2. **❌ Tight Coupling** |
| 42 | + - Icon parsing depended on extension system |
| 43 | + - Required `FletBackend` parameter that wasn't actually used |
| 44 | + |
| 45 | +3. **❌ Difficult to Extend** |
| 46 | + - Adding new icon sets required modifying extension classes |
| 47 | + - Changes to icon system affected extension architecture |
| 48 | + |
| 49 | +4. **❌ Scattered Logic** |
| 50 | + - Icon handling was mixed with widget/service creation |
| 51 | + - Hard to test icon logic independently |
| 52 | + |
| 53 | +5. **❌ Unnecessary Dependencies** |
| 54 | + - Icon parsing required backend context |
| 55 | + - Functions had more parameters than needed |
| 56 | + |
| 57 | +## New Approach (Icon Registry) |
| 58 | + |
| 59 | +### How It Works |
| 60 | +```dart |
| 61 | +// 1. Centralized icon registry |
| 62 | +class IconRegistry { |
| 63 | + static final IconRegistry _instance = IconRegistry._internal(); |
| 64 | + factory IconRegistry() => _instance; |
| 65 | +
|
| 66 | + final Map<int, List<IconData>> _iconSets = { |
| 67 | + 1: materialIcons, // Material Icons |
| 68 | + 2: cupertinoIcons, // Cupertino Icons |
| 69 | + }; |
| 70 | +
|
| 71 | + IconData? createIconData(int iconCode) { |
| 72 | + int setId = (iconCode >> 16) & 0xFF; |
| 73 | + int iconIndex = iconCode & 0xFFFF; |
| 74 | +
|
| 75 | + final iconSet = _iconSets[setId]; |
| 76 | + if (iconSet != null && iconIndex < iconSet.length) { |
| 77 | + return iconSet[iconIndex]; |
| 78 | + } |
| 79 | + return null; |
| 80 | + } |
| 81 | +
|
| 82 | + void registerIconSet(int setId, List<IconData> icons) { |
| 83 | + _iconSets[setId] = icons; |
| 84 | + } |
| 85 | +} |
| 86 | +
|
| 87 | +// 2. Clean, simple API |
| 88 | +IconData? parseIconData(int? value, [IconData? defaultValue]) { |
| 89 | + if (value == null) return defaultValue; |
| 90 | + return IconRegistry().createIconData(value); |
| 91 | +} |
| 92 | +
|
| 93 | +// 3. Clean FletExtension (focused on core responsibilities) |
| 94 | +class FletExtension { |
| 95 | + Widget? createWidget(Key? key, Control control) { return null; } |
| 96 | + FletService? createService(Control control) { return null; } |
| 97 | + // No more createIconData method! |
| 98 | +} |
| 99 | +``` |
| 100 | + |
| 101 | +### Benefits of New Approach |
| 102 | + |
| 103 | +1. **✅ Clean Separation of Concerns** |
| 104 | + - `FletExtension` focuses only on widgets and services |
| 105 | + - Icon logic is isolated in dedicated registry |
| 106 | + |
| 107 | +2. **✅ Reduced Coupling** |
| 108 | + - Icon parsing is completely independent |
| 109 | + - No dependencies on extension or backend systems |
| 110 | + |
| 111 | +3. **✅ Easy to Extend** |
| 112 | + - New icon sets can be registered without touching core classes |
| 113 | + - Simple API: `registry.registerIconSet(3, customIcons)` |
| 114 | + |
| 115 | +4. **✅ Centralized Logic** |
| 116 | + - All icon handling in one place |
| 117 | + - Easy to test and maintain |
| 118 | + |
| 119 | +5. **✅ Simplified API** |
| 120 | + - Removed unnecessary `FletBackend` parameter |
| 121 | + - Functions are more focused and easier to use |
| 122 | + |
| 123 | +## Architecture Comparison |
| 124 | + |
| 125 | +### Before: Extension-Based |
| 126 | +``` |
| 127 | +parseIconData() → FletBackend.extensions → extension.createIconData() |
| 128 | +``` |
| 129 | + |
| 130 | +### After: Registry-Based |
| 131 | +``` |
| 132 | +parseIconData() → IconRegistry.createIconData() |
| 133 | +``` |
| 134 | + |
| 135 | +## Code Examples |
| 136 | + |
| 137 | +### Adding Custom Icons (Before) |
| 138 | +```dart |
| 139 | +// Had to modify extension classes |
| 140 | +class CustomExtension extends FletExtension { |
| 141 | + @override |
| 142 | + IconData? createIconData(int iconCode) { |
| 143 | + // Add custom logic here |
| 144 | + if (setId == 3) return customIcons[iconIndex]; |
| 145 | + return super.createIconData(iconCode); |
| 146 | + } |
| 147 | +} |
| 148 | +``` |
| 149 | + |
| 150 | +### Adding Custom Icons (After) |
| 151 | +```dart |
| 152 | +// Simple registration |
| 153 | +final registry = IconRegistry(); |
| 154 | +final customIcons = [Icons.favorite, Icons.star]; |
| 155 | +registry.registerIconSet(3, customIcons); |
| 156 | +// Done! Now use: 0x00030000, 0x00030001, etc. |
| 157 | +``` |
| 158 | + |
| 159 | +## Migration Impact |
| 160 | + |
| 161 | +### ✅ Backward Compatible |
| 162 | +- All existing icon codes continue to work |
| 163 | +- Material Icons: `0x0001XXXX` (setId = 1) |
| 164 | +- Cupertino Icons: `0x0002XXXX` (setId = 2) |
| 165 | + |
| 166 | +### ✅ API Changes |
| 167 | +- `parseIconData(int? value, FletBackend backend, [IconData? defaultValue])` |
| 168 | + → `parseIconData(int? value, [IconData? defaultValue])` |
| 169 | +- `parseWidgetStateIcon(dynamic value, FletBackend backend, ThemeData theme, ...)` |
| 170 | + → `parseWidgetStateIcon(dynamic value, ThemeData theme, ...)` |
| 171 | + |
| 172 | +## Testing & Quality |
| 173 | + |
| 174 | +### ✅ Comprehensive Tests |
| 175 | +- Material and Cupertino icon creation |
| 176 | +- Unknown icon set handling |
| 177 | +- Out of bounds index handling |
| 178 | +- Custom icon set registration |
| 179 | +- All tests pass ✅ |
| 180 | + |
| 181 | +### ✅ Code Quality |
| 182 | +- No compilation errors |
| 183 | +- Clean architecture |
| 184 | +- Follows single responsibility principle |
| 185 | +- Easy to maintain and extend |
| 186 | + |
| 187 | +## Future Benefits |
| 188 | + |
| 189 | +The registry pattern enables future enhancements: |
| 190 | +- Icon set validation |
| 191 | +- Icon metadata (names, categories) |
| 192 | +- Dynamic icon loading |
| 193 | +- Icon set versioning |
| 194 | +- Performance optimizations |
| 195 | + |
| 196 | +## Conclusion |
| 197 | + |
| 198 | +This refactoring transforms a **tightly coupled, scattered system** into a **clean, centralized, and extensible architecture**. The `FletExtension` class is now properly focused on its core responsibilities, while the icon system is self-contained and easy to extend. This is a significant improvement in code quality and maintainability. |
0 commit comments