-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
feat: add lifecycle methods to route config #172
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
matt-sneed
wants to merge
9
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
fix/enhanced-lifecycle-hooks
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 7 commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
26d4cbe
feat: add lifecycle methods to route config.
matt-sneed 34df6ef
docs: add documentation on new lifecycle methods
matt-sneed ab09f79
fix: route-tree-node lifecycle call incorrect
matt-sneed 4d74b14
test: update tests
matt-sneed 43d7db4
docs: updated documentation on lifecycle execution
matt-sneed 9f2599e
docs: update jsdocs for the activate method
matt-sneed 5252535
docs: update readme docs
matt-sneed 960c301
Merge branch 'master' into fix/enhanced-lifecycle-hooks
matt-sneed b3f1099
chore: merge from latest
matt-sneed File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does it semantically make sense to allow the
routEnter()callback to have a return value? My mental model is that the transition has already occurred by the time that hook is called so the window to abort would have passed.I also notice that we don't have symmetry between the exit and enter hooks (exit lacks a "before" flavor). Could these just be collapsed into one enter and one exit (the way the mixin does) and have them return
booleanvalues to indicate if the transition can occur?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@C-Duxbury i was just recreating the same logic that was currently there, but for the routeData version. i believe the intention is to prevent recursing down the node list so that if a parent returned false in it's lifecycle method it would prevent further tree navigation.
web-component-router/lib/route-tree-node.js
Line 339 in 5252535
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I edited my comment to expand on this. Should we just have a single "enter" hook that occurs before and can return a
booleanvalue to indicate if the transition can occur? I'm wondering if there's value in having distinct before/after hooks for route enter since the mixin doesn't.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can't think of a use case that needs both unless there is some case for performing since actions after committing to entering a route. Seems reasonable to have just the single case. @matt-sneed ?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed, this is what I'm picturing:
entry
exit
So the
RouteDatain the config only provides thebeforeEnterand/orbeforeExithooks. The components can still implementrouteEnterand/orrouteExitbut are not required to do so.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@matt-sneed Do we need router-specific hooks to satisfy this use case? My thought is that
connectedCallback()orfirstUpdated()could be used for this purpose. The component doesn't need to have knowledge about routing to do something when it's placed into the DOM.I think we can probably get away with just having one enter and exit hook each in the config to allow actions/guards that happen before the transition occurs and the element is placed in the DOM.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jrobinson01 agree with that statement, i'm saying that the router provides the "hook" to let the app do that job. now part of the equation is what lifecycle hooks are needed to do all the use cases we might need.
@C-Duxbury here's a couple pointed examples of where that may not work, and using a routeEnter in a component is still needed:
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@matt-sneed We'd need a way to get at the route context directly from the
Routerinstance to support this use case without hooks. You'd basically just move the logic fromrouterEnter()intofirstUpdated():This is one of the gaps I mentioned in the comparison document. Getting the context outside of hooks would be a separate enhancement PR, but I think it's orthogonal with the goal here of providing ways to route without inheritance.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, i think if we had access to the current route context in some consumable way at any point in the lifecycle, it does change the requirements
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The router currently reuses components that are already in the tree, so for an existing component, the router would need to have changed one of the component's properties in order to trigger the lit lifecycle events. That might be sufficient for most (all?) use cases where a component needs to react to a route change but maybe worth pointing out here.