feat: add avoid-shrink-wrap-in-lists

[incendial]

What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to an item)

[ ] Documentation update
[ ] Bug fix
[X] New rule
[ ] Changes an existing rule
[ ] Add autofixing to a rule
[ ] Add a CLI option
[ ] Add something to the core
[ ] Other, please explain:

Implementing https://github.com/dart-lang/linter/issues/3496

[github-actions]

Dart Code Metrics unused files report of dart_code_metrics. ✅

Summary

• Scanned package folders: bin, example, lib
• No unused files found! ✅

[github-actions]

Dart Code Metrics analyze report of dart_code_metrics. ✅

Summary

• Scanned folders: bin, example, lib, test

• Total scanned files: 460

• Total lines of source code: 8040

• Total classes: 318

• Average Cyclomatic Number per line of code: 0.35

• Average Source Lines of Code per method: 6

• Total tech debt: 1382.0 hours

• Found issues: 6 ⚠

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #918 (1719595) into master (9fd3b58) will increase coverage by 0.06%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     dart-lang/linter#918      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   87.45%   87.52%   +0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         304      306       +2     
  Lines        6266     6300      +34     
==========================================
+ Hits         5480     5514      +34     
  Misses        786      786              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...c/analyzers/lint_analyzer/rules/rules_factory.dart	71.42% <ø> (ø)
...wrap_in_lists/avoid_shrink_wrap_in_lists_rule.dart	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...rules_list/avoid_shrink_wrap_in_lists/visitor.dart	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/src/utils/flutter_types_utils.dart	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 9fd3b58...1719595. Read the comment docs.

[gabrielaraujoz]

hey @incendial , awesome work! I took the liberty of reviewing your PR and I think there's one way to make it even better: when we have a list inside another like we're testing, we usually have to wrap them in an Expanded Widget (check the bad case scenario). Because of that, I believe it would be better if we test for that case as well in this rule.

WDYT? Does that make sense to you? Let me know if you need me to make the adjustments for you, I'd be glad to help!

[incendial]

@gabrielaraujoz hi! Thanks for taking a look. Do you mean that we should first check if the ListView is in the Expanded and then if it's in the Column/Row/ListView?

[gabrielaraujoz]

Hey! If I'd do it, I'd check for both scenarios: if it's parent is an Expanded that has a Column/Row parent and the cases you're currently testing as well.

When working with Column and Row, if you have a widget with unbounded height/width you need to wrap it in a Flexible or Expanded, else you'll have the unbounded height/width exception. I don't believe this is necessary for ListViews tbh

[incendial]

@gabrielaraujoz but it looks like wrapping in Expanded is a subset of all cases when a ListView is in the Column/Row, isn't it? Meaning, that the current check already covers it

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information