…ies. (#134993)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the painting and rendering libraries.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- #134984
- #134991
- #134992
- #134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…al. (#134991)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the material library.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- #134984
- #134992
- #134993
- #134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the animation, cupertino, foundation, gestures, semantics, and services libraries.  Each of them only had a few, so I lumped them together.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- #134991
- #134992
- #134993
- #134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…library (#134992)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the widgets library.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- #134984
- #134991
- #134993
- #134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)

…amework libraries (flutter#134994)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so must not be null" or "so-and-so must be non-null" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the library in the repo that don't have anything to do with the framework.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- flutter#134984
- flutter#134991
- flutter#134992
- flutter#134993

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…ies. (flutter#134993)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the painting and rendering libraries.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- flutter#134984
- flutter#134991
- flutter#134992
- flutter#134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…al. (flutter#134991)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the material library.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- flutter#134984
- flutter#134992
- flutter#134993
- flutter#134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…34984)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the animation, cupertino, foundation, gestures, semantics, and services libraries.  Each of them only had a few, so I lumped them together.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- flutter#134991
- flutter#134992
- flutter#134993
- flutter#134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…library (flutter#134992)

## Description

This removes all of the comments that are of the form "so-and-so (must not be null|can ?not be null|must be non-null)" from the cases where those values are defines as non-nullable values.

This PR removes them from the widgets library.

This was done by hand, since it really didn't lend itself to scripting, so it needs to be more than just spot-checked, I think. I was careful to leave any comment that referred to parameters that were nullable, but I may have missed some.

In addition to being no longer relevant after null safety has been made the default, these comments were largely fragile, in that it was easy for them to get out of date, and not be accurate anymore anyhow.

This did create a number of constructor comments which basically say "Creates a [Foo].", but I don't really know how to avoid that in a large scale change, since there's not much you can really say in a lot of cases.  I think we might consider some leniency for constructors to the "Comment must be meaningful" style guidance (which we de facto have already, since there are a bunch of these).

## Related PRs
- flutter#134984
- flutter#134991
- flutter#134993
- flutter#134994

## Tests
 - Documentation only change.

…m non-framework libraries (flutter/flutter#134994)