Skip to content

Conversation

remcohaszing
Copy link
Member

Initial checklist

  • I read the support docs
  • I read the contributing guide
  • I agree to follow the code of conduct
  • I searched issues and discussions and couldn’t find anything or linked relevant results below
  • I made sure the docs are up to date
  • I included tests (or that’s not needed)

Description of changes

In MarkdownHooks we don’t need to create the processor for every render. We only need it inside the effect.

In `MarkdownHooks` we don’t need to create the processor for every
render. We only need it inside the effect.
@remcohaszing remcohaszing added 🏁 area/perf This affects performance 👶 semver/patch This is a backwards-compatible fix 🦋 type/enhancement This is great to have 🌐 platform/browser This affects browsers 🤞 phase/open Post is being triaged manually labels Apr 18, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 18, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (2245c64) to head (4f8d5d1).
Report is 47 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              main      #908    +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%            
==========================================
  Files            3         3            
  Lines         1354      1743   +389     
  Branches       113       123    +10     
==========================================
+ Hits          1354      1743   +389     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@JounQin
Copy link
Member

JounQin commented Apr 18, 2025

LGTM. Would it improve perf and resolve https://github.com/orgs/rehypejs/discussions/194?

@remcohaszing
Copy link
Member Author

Not necessarily, but it does give me an idea. I need to fiddle a bit.

@remcohaszing remcohaszing marked this pull request as draft April 18, 2025 18:20
@remcohaszing
Copy link
Member Author

I’m closing this in favor of #909

This comment was marked as resolved.

@remcohaszing remcohaszing deleted the processor-in-effect branch April 18, 2025 18:48
@wooorm wooorm added the 🙅 no/wontfix This is not (enough of) an issue for this project label Apr 19, 2025

This comment was marked as resolved.

@wooorm
Copy link
Member

wooorm commented Apr 19, 2025

please apply labels when closing, thanks!

@github-actions github-actions bot added 👎 phase/no Post cannot or will not be acted on and removed 🤞 phase/open Post is being triaged manually labels Apr 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

🏁 area/perf This affects performance 🙅 no/wontfix This is not (enough of) an issue for this project 👎 phase/no Post cannot or will not be acted on 🌐 platform/browser This affects browsers 👶 semver/patch This is a backwards-compatible fix 🦋 type/enhancement This is great to have

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants