When I first started working with Flutter, my priorities were speed and momentum. I wanted to ship screens quickly, explore the framework’s flexibility, and prove that I could turn ideas into working applications. Like many developers, I learned Flutter through tutorials, sample projects, and experimentation.
That phase was necessary — but it also shaped decisions that later became expensive.
Only after shipping real applications, maintaining them over time, and living with the consequences of early choices did I realize something important: most Flutter problems don’t come from lack of knowledge — they come from early assumptions that go unquestioned.
This article is not a guide for beginners, nor is it a list of “best practices.”
It’s a reflection on five decisions that felt reasonable at the time, but revealed their cost months later.
If I were starting Flutter today, with what I know now, these are the decisions I would approach very differently.
1. I Would Define Change Boundaries Before Writing UI
What I did before
In my early Flutter projects, I treated UI as the starting point. I designed screens, built widgets, wired interactions, and then slowly layered logic underneath. This felt natural — Flutter makes UI expressive and enjoyable to write, so it’s tempting to start there.
The problem was not that UI came first.
The problem was that UI quietly became the place where decisions lived.
Business rules leaked into widgets. Conditional logic spread across build methods. Navigation decisions became tightly coupled to UI state. At first, everything worked. Over time, small changes began to feel risky.
What broke later
As the application evolved:
- Screens that looked simple controlled too much behavior
- Reusing logic across flows became painful
- A UI change could unexpectedly affect data handling
- Refactoring required deep context and caution
Nothing was “wrong” in isolation. But the cost of change increased steadily.
What I would do today
Now, I start by asking:
- What is likely to change?
- What must remain stable?
- Which rules belong to the product, not the screen?
Before building UI, I define clear boundaries:
- UI displays state, it does not decide it
- Business logic lives outside widgets
- Navigation is driven by intent, not UI conditionals
This approach doesn’t slow development — it protects it.
When change arrives (and it always does), the app bends instead of cracking.
2. I Would Treat State Management as a Cognitive Load Decision
What I did before
Like many Flutter developers, I initially treated state management as a tooling problem. I compared libraries, followed community preferences, and chose solutions that looked clean or modern.
At the time, the question was:
“Which state management solution should I use?”
That was the wrong question.
The real cost I underestimated
Over time, I noticed that the biggest issues weren’t performance or features — they were mental friction:
- Debugging required jumping across abstractions
- Understanding data flow took effort
- Returning to old code felt heavier than expected
The app worked, but it wasn’t easy to think about.
That’s when it clicked:
State management is not about code — it’s about cognition.
What I would do today
Now, I choose state management based on:
- Explicit data flow
- Predictability of side effects
- Ease of reasoning during debugging
I ask myself:
- Can I explain this flow without diagrams?
- Can I trace state changes quickly?
- Will this make future changes safer or harder?
The best solution is not the most flexible — it’s the one that reduces thinking overhead.
In production, clarity beats elegance every time.
3. I Would Stop Optimizing for Reuse and Start Optimizing for Understanding
What I did before
Earlier in my career, I believed reuse was always good. If logic appeared twice, I abstracted it. If patterns repeated, I generalized them. The codebase became “clean” — but also increasingly indirect.
The intention was good.
The outcome was not.
The hidden cost of clever abstractions
Months later, I noticed:
- Reading code required jumping through layers
- Simple changes demanded global understanding
- Bugs hid inside generic helpers
Worse, I sometimes had to re-learn my own abstractions.
The code was reusable — but not readable.
What I would do today
Today, I value local clarity over global reuse.
I prefer:
- Slight duplication with clear intent
- Explicit logic over generic helpers
- Straightforward flows over abstract patterns
If a piece of code is important, I want it to be:
- Easy to find
- Easy to read
- Easy to change
Reusable code is not automatically good code.
Understandable code is.
4. I Would Treat Performance as an Architectural Habit, Not a Fix
What I did before
In early projects, performance was reactive. If something felt slow, I optimized it. If users complained, I investigated. Flutter’s performance tools made this feel manageable.
But performance issues rarely appear in isolation.
What actually happened
Over time:
- Rebuilds became expensive
- Widget trees grew heavy
- Small UI changes had unexpected cost
Fixing performance late meant:
- Risky refactors
- Time spent chasing symptoms
- Compromises in UX
The real issue wasn’t lack of optimization — it was lack of intention.
What I would do today
Now, I treat performance as a design habit:
- Clear rebuild boundaries
- Conscious widget composition
- Awareness of what actually triggers work
Not premature optimization — deliberate structure.
Flutter rewards developers who respect how the framework works.
Ignoring that always shows up later.
5. I Would Think Like a Maintainer From the First Commit
This is the most important change.
What I did before
I thought like a builder:
- Can this work?
- Can I ship this?
- Can I add features quickly?
And that worked — initially.
What maintenance taught me
Over time, I realized:
- Apps slow down because people fear touching code
- Velocity drops when intent is unclear
- Technical debt is often emotional, not technical
Code that feels unsafe to change becomes frozen.
What I would do today
If I started today, I would think like someone who must live with the code:
- Clear folder boundaries
- Small comments explaining why, not what
- Consistent patterns across the app
I would optimize for:
- Confidence
- Safety
- Ease of change
Shipping is an event. Maintenance is a long-term commitment.
Closing Reflection
Flutter is not the reason most apps struggle long-term.
The framework is capable, expressive, and powerful.
What fails is how we think when we start.
If I began again today, I wouldn’t aim to be faster.
I would aim to be clearer — in intent, structure, and trade-offs.
That clarity compounds over time.
About the Author
I’m Abdul Wahab, a Flutter developer and product builder focused on building production-ready applications with long-term maintainability in mind.
I occasionally share practical reflections from real projects on:
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/abdul-wahab-0bb90b361
- Official site: https://fadsync.com
These thoughts are based on hands-on experience and continue to evolve with every product shipped.
Top comments (0)