property shorthand usage for animations cause errors in production build

[crysislinux]

🐞 Bug report

Command (mark with an x)

• new
• build

Is this a regression?

Yes

Our code ran without problem with --prod build flag in angular 7.

But now it fails with the same flag in angular 9 with ivy enabled.

Description

We have some shared animations definitions like this:

animations.ts

import { trigger, transition, style, group, animate } from '@angular/animations';

export const animations = [
  trigger('expandIn', [
    transition(':enter', [
      style({
        overflow: 'hidden',
        height: 0,
        paddingTop: 0,
        paddingBottom: 0,
        marginTop: 0,
        marginBottom: 0,
        opacity: 0
      }),
      group([
        animate('500ms cubic-bezier(0.23, 1, 0.32, 1)', style({
          height: '*', paddingTop: '*', paddingBottom: '*', marginTop: '*', marginBottom: '*', transform: 'translateZ(0)'
        })),
        animate('250ms cubic-bezier(0.23, 1, 0.32, 1)', style({ opacity: 1 }))
      ])
    ]),
  ]),
];

the animations are defined in a separate file animations.ts. And then it's referenced like this:

import { Component, OnInit } from '@angular/core';
import { animations } from './animations';

@Component({
  selector: 'app-notlazycomp',
  templateUrl: './notlazycomp.component.html',
  styleUrls: ['./notlazycomp.component.scss'],
  animations,  // notice this property shorthand syntax
})
export class NotLazycompComponent implements OnInit {

  constructor() { }

  ngOnInit(): void {
  }

}

Those codes look good to me and they works in Angular 7. Now with Angular 9, the production build will throw runtime error:

I have found 3 ways to workaround it:

1. disable ivy with "enableIvy": false,
2. set "optimization": false, in production configuration (aot and buildOptimizer can still be true)
3. abandon property shorthand for animations property, just change to animations: animations also fixes the problem.

We went with option 3 but it looks confusing why valid typescript code doesn't work and the linter even tell me to use property shorthand. It's fine to be a compilation error but unacceptable to be a runtime error only.

🔬 Minimal Reproduction

1. clone repo: https://github.com/crysislinux/angular9-prod-build-runtime-error
2. npm run build to create production build
3. http-server dist/angular9-ext -p 4200
4. visit http://localhost:4200/

You should see some error messages in the console.

5. switch optimization from true to false in angular.json line 43
6. repeat step 2 to 4

Now it loads without problem.

7. switch optimization from false to true
8. repeat step 2 to 4

Now you should see the problem again

9. edit src/app/notlazy/notlazycomp/notlazycomp.component.ts, change line 8 from animations, to animations: animations,
10. repeat step 2 to 4

Now it loads without problem.

Turn off ivy also fix the problem but I have a lazy load route in the repo so it may not work. By the way, this problem also breaks the lazy loading if there is the same animations property shorthand usage in the lazy loaded module.

🔥 Exception or Error

🌍 Your Environment

Angular CLI: 9.1.0
Node: 10.16.0
OS: darwin x64

Angular: 9.1.0
... animations, cli, common, compiler, compiler-cli, core, forms
... language-service, platform-browser, platform-browser-dynamic
... router
Ivy Workspace: Yes

Package                           Version
-----------------------------------------------------------
@angular-devkit/architect         0.901.0
@angular-devkit/build-angular     0.901.0
@angular-devkit/build-optimizer   0.901.0
@angular-devkit/build-webpack     0.901.0
@angular-devkit/core              9.1.0
@angular-devkit/schematics        9.1.0
@ngtools/webpack                  9.1.0
@schematics/angular               9.1.0
@schematics/update                0.901.0
rxjs                              6.5.4
typescript                        3.7.5
webpack                           4.42.0

Anything else relevant?

N/A

[getabetterpic]

We've run into this exact same issue. Right now I'm also going through and replacing these shorthand instances with animations: animations but it worries me that none of our CI builds caught this. It would be possible for one of these to slip in and we wouldn't know until something broke in prod.