Riverpod vs provider In flutter

[samwaigwa]

Riverpod Vs. Provider In Flutter

Proposed article introduction

The one point of contention with flutter is that there are far "too many" state management methods to choose from, making it difficult to decide which to utilize. There is some truth to that, as well as the fact that there is a largely overlooked benefit to this; I will write a detailed article about it soon, but the one benefit is that it is much easier to find state management solutions that are almost exactly the right fit for your situation, rather than "one size fits all" solutions with unnecessary redundancies and complexities. So far, we've looked at state management methods including stateful widgets, hooks, inherited widgets, Providers, and others, all of which are generally a good fit for small projects.

Providers, as we all know, were based on inherited widgets that added their own features to make it easier to use, intuitive, readable, and all the other benefits it offered. However, as the number of codebases grew, so did the number of needs, exposing more of the provider's flaws. The widget tree and build contexts are heavily reliant on the provider, which isn't necessarily a negative thing, but it does come with risks.

Key takeaways

• explain Riverpod different flavors
• How to install Riverpod
• develop simple application to show Riverpod implementation.
• potray difference between provider and Riverpod using example application.

[github-actions[bot]]

👋 @samwaigwa Good afternoon and thank you for submitting your topic suggestion. Your topic form has been entered into our queue and should be reviewed (for approval) as soon as a content moderator is finished reviewing the ones in the queue before it.

[LinusMuema]

Hi @samwaigwa

You need to clear the pre-submission advice for us to easily review your article suggestion. We will be closing this at the moment so you can work on this. Once done, please ping us so we can review it.

[samwaigwa]

@LinusMuema am done rectifying

[samwaigwa]

@LinusMuema kindly reopen the issue and approve it