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

Trying to fix #1916 #1918

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Oct 31, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@robinchew
Copy link
Contributor

robinchew commented Jul 28, 2017

Select change event does not update options correctly. This fix will correct it but test fails.

Issue #1916

@robinchew robinchew requested a review from lhorie as a code owner Jul 28, 2017

@isiahmeadows isiahmeadows requested review from pygy and isiahmeadows and removed request for lhorie Jul 28, 2017

@botvac

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

botvac commented Jul 28, 2017

Warnings
⚠️

Please add an entry to docs/change-log.md.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS

@isiahmeadows

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

isiahmeadows commented Jul 28, 2017

Your error is running into this limitation, but it's not your fault. @pygy Me thinks this is a good time to fix it? It seems a bit simpler than what we currently have, ironically enough.

@pygy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

pygy commented Jul 28, 2017

@isiahmeadows I'll look into the DOM spec details this weekend. I don't think the mocks have a concept of dirtiness for options, and currently setting the value of a select doesn't change the selected attributes of the children.

@isiahmeadows

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

isiahmeadows commented Jul 28, 2017

If I'm reading the spec correctly, I think the concept of dirtiness is really just a (IMHO poorly named) locking mechanism for the selected HTML attribute (as opposed to the IDL-side option.selected getter/setter). If we opt to not support the attribute, I'm not sure we need to implement the "dirtiness" value.

@isiahmeadows

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

isiahmeadows commented Aug 31, 2017

@pygy Can we merge this PR first, adding a tracking issue for the broken options.selected, and then once one of us gets this magical thing called time (😄), come back to fix it?

@tivac

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

tivac commented Aug 31, 2017

If this gets merged w/ failing tests it's gonna need someone committing to fix the tests soon after. I think the PR is fine, but I'm really uncomfortable with leaving the build broken.

@isiahmeadows isiahmeadows referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2017

Open

Tracking bug for DOM mock issues #1978

1 of 2 tasks complete

@robinchew robinchew requested a review from tivac as a code owner Oct 25, 2017

@robinchew robinchew force-pushed the robinchew:issue1916 branch from b2e63aa to a2c513b Oct 25, 2017

@isiahmeadows

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

isiahmeadows commented Oct 25, 2017

@pygy @tivac Are you okay with this?

BTW, I instructed @robinchew on Gitter to include the commented out test because I plan to migrate most of the tests to run on the DOM as well if it's available (better test coverage), and I'm more likely to remember to test for this particular bug if it's already there.

@pygy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

pygy commented Oct 29, 2017

@isiahmeadows let's merge it with a stubbed test, yes (a failing test in next would be a pain to work around while working on other aspects of the code base).

@isiahmeadows

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

isiahmeadows commented Oct 30, 2017

@pygy So beyond that, does this PR look okay to merge?

@pygy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

pygy commented Oct 31, 2017

@isiahmeadows I'd say yes

@pygy

pygy approved these changes Oct 31, 2017

@pygy pygy merged commit db2a12d into MithrilJS:next Oct 31, 2017

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

pygy added a commit to pygy/mithril.js that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2017

@pygy pygy referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2017

Merged

render: fix perf regression introduced by #1918 #2052

4 of 10 tasks complete

pygy added a commit to pygy/mithril.js that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2017

isiahmeadows pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2017

Isiah Meadows
Merge pull request #2052 from pygy/fix-perf-regression
render: fix perf regression introduced by #1918

isiahmeadows added a commit to isiahmeadows/mithril.js that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2018

Trying to fix MithrilJS#1916 (MithrilJS#1918)
* Trying to fix MithrilJS#1916

* Remove test for rendering select options. Add back after resolving issue MithrilJS#1978.

* Add MithrilJS#1916 fix to change log.

* Revert "Remove test for rendering select options. Add back after resolving issue MithrilJS#1978."

This reverts commit d4c1be7.

* Comment on why failing test for MithrilJS#1916 is commented out.

isiahmeadows added a commit to isiahmeadows/mithril.js that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment