Deleted user

@lumpidu: please refer to this comment for the context: https://github.com/dart-lang/language/issues/2708#issuecomment-2284909963

Linter could print a warning for every constant greater than 9 written with a leading zero. Having encountered `0666`, it could print: "aren't you by any chance trying to set...

But such a (rare) program can use `// ignore: ` comment, no?

Maybe this extension method can solve the problem for cascade? (Not sure) ```dart extension on Future { Future get wait async => await this; } ``` Example: ```dart class A...

in #25, there's a proposal to introduce a suffix form of await, like ```dart var x = foo.bar().await.baz().await; ``` This "suffix await" can be defined to optionally take the form...

Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying :-) Except that the returned value of fn should be `FutureOr` to allow `sync:true` parameter to take effect.

How about This "suffix await" can be defined to ~~optionally~~ take the form of a function call. To me, it looks more natural with the parens anyway. (you can also...

For this, you don't need to expose "value" or write an extension. Assuming that runtime knows how to differentiate between a real Future and a Future wrapped around the value,...

> then we'd allow x.+ in general, to refer to the operator+ method. Will that allow tearoffs like `final add = 3.+;` ?

I would really prefer to have `unawaited` as a keyword rather than a weird wrapper function. A keyword not only would make it behave and look the same as the...