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

Consume File-Icons' element-icon service #412

Merged
merged 24 commits into from Oct 31, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@Alhadis
Contributor

Alhadis commented Feb 8, 2017

This PR applies to the tabs package what's been described in atom/tree-view#1146 for the tree-view package. The PR's updated wording describes this scenario best, so I'll just copy+paste:


I realised too late that your icon-service fulfils a different purpose from what our package needed. We wrote our own instead, which is built on a dubious but (currently) stable foundation of monkey-patches.

Opinions differ on the subject, but mine is that monkey-patching code you didn't write is bad, and should only be used as a last resort (DOM polyfills notwithstanding). Which is precisely what I've been forced to do to get dynamic icon-assignment working.

This needs to be fixed at a formal level, because:

  1. Patches don't persist if File-Icons is deactivated and reactivated.
    I've actually chosen not to fix this, because it would step outside the expected lifecycle of the package. E.g., when a user deactivates a package, they expect it to leave no traces in the workspace. I also can't imagine this happening too often, but still...

  2. Any innocent change to your packages could break stuff.
    The obvious danger of monkey-patching what wasn't expected or supposed to be changed. We have specs to alert us of breakage, but there's no telling what would be involved in the repair. We both know this is the wrong approach.

Now, I don't know how the Atom team would feel about adding support for third-party package services. Ideally, this would be addressed on the level of Atom's core icon-API. However, the differences of our needs (as well as the specific use-case of our needs) make me hesitant to propose a change to your existing service, especially because @as-cii has stressed he prefers keeping its functionality simple for the time being. In light of that, it would be more appropriate and ergonomic to support a third-party service in the interim, should a mutually-compatible solution be realised in future.

What this service does

The file-icons.element-icons service, when consumed, provides a function to add dynamic icons to DOM elements. The function is to be called by the package on any element that's supposed to represent a filesystem resource (either files, or directories):

let fileIcon = document.querySelector("li.file-entry > span.icon");
addIconToElement(fileIcon, "/path/to/file.txt");

Calling the function returns a Disposable that clears the icon-node instance from memory, which should be done once the view is destroyed.

Note there's no requirement to specify whether a path is a file or directory. Our heavy-duty filesystem API takes care of the heavy lifting... I've even plans to separate it from File-Icons in the form of a standalone Node module, so other package authors can benefit from my hard work too. :)

Related pull-requests

@50Wliu 50Wliu added the needs-review label Feb 13, 2017

@gnestor

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gnestor

gnestor Feb 28, 2017

+1 for this PR as it fixes an issue with file-icons and project-plus compatibility

gnestor commented Feb 28, 2017

+1 for this PR as it fixes an issue with file-icons and project-plus compatibility

@gnestor

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gnestor

gnestor commented Feb 28, 2017

@Alhadis More services!!!

things

@Alhadis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Alhadis

Alhadis Oct 26, 2017

Contributor

/cc @nathansobo PR updated. I doubt it'll take long to review; it follows the same approach as tree-view.

Again, you'll want to squash-merge, unless you want merge-commits clogging the repository's revision history...

Contributor

Alhadis commented Oct 26, 2017

/cc @nathansobo PR updated. I doubt it'll take long to review; it follows the same approach as tree-view.

Again, you'll want to squash-merge, unless you want merge-commits clogging the repository's revision history...

@nathansobo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nathansobo

nathansobo Oct 30, 2017

Contributor

One thing I just realized... could you add some tests for the service code paths where you sub in a different icon?

Contributor

nathansobo commented Oct 30, 2017

One thing I just realized... could you add some tests for the service code paths where you sub in a different icon?

@nathansobo nathansobo self-assigned this Oct 30, 2017

@Alhadis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Alhadis

Alhadis Oct 31, 2017

Contributor

@nathansobo Will that do?

Contributor

Alhadis commented Oct 31, 2017

@nathansobo Will that do?

@nathansobo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nathansobo

nathansobo Oct 31, 2017

Contributor

The structure of the code looks good here, but the tests are failing for me locally and on AppVeyor as well.

Contributor

nathansobo commented Oct 31, 2017

The structure of the code looks good here, but the tests are failing for me locally and on AppVeyor as well.

@Alhadis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Alhadis
Contributor

Alhadis commented Oct 31, 2017

@nathansobo nathansobo merged commit 5a764f9 into atom:master Oct 31, 2017

1 check passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
@nathansobo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nathansobo

nathansobo Oct 31, 2017

Contributor

Published as 0.109.0 and upgraded in atom/atom@cffa433. Thanks for incorporating feedback so quickly.

Contributor

nathansobo commented Oct 31, 2017

Published as 0.109.0 and upgraded in atom/atom@cffa433. Thanks for incorporating feedback so quickly.

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