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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
fix(ivy): setting up animation properties correctly (FW-643) #27496
fix(ivy): setting up animation properties correctly (FW-643) #27496
Changes from 5 commits
56f3974
2740e09
53036e9
7c8a9a9
39c966a
5342f0f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
If we don't have an else here, this won't throw for animation triggers when no animations module is present (as it may not be a procedural renderer then). This is a deviation from ViewEngine.
Would it be an idea to introduce an instruction for animations and not consider them as regular attributes? That offers more freedom in the future.
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.
Hey @JoostK. At this very moment we don't know exactly how the
@animation
attrs will be passed into the non-renderer case (when onlydocument
is active). We don't want to introduce anything temporary until the design is figured out therefore the single if statement case is the best we can do for now.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.
@matsko That makes sense, thanks for the reply!
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.
Consider rewriting this logic to become the same as
elementProperty
, we could reduce the twoisProc
checks and calls to a single one.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.
Thanks for reviewing this PR. You are right, there are few places where this logic exists in
instructions.ts
, but I'd prefer to have another cleanup/refactor PR to separate these changes (I'll take a note on that). Thank you.