Unit test covering edge case related to 'withChildren' parameter inside Renderer added #1455
Conversation
|
|
||
| expect( domRoot.innerHTML ).to.equal( '<ul><li>Foo</li><li><b>Bar</b></li></ul>' ); | ||
|
|
||
| const viewLi = view.getChild( 0 ); |
| expect( domRoot.innerHTML ).to.equal( '<ul><li>Foo</li><li><b>Bar</b></li></ul>' ); | ||
|
|
||
| const viewLi = view.getChild( 0 ); | ||
| const viewLiIndented = view._removeChildren( 1, 1 ); // Array with one element. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand what this line does. Which <li> does it remove? There's no indented <li> at this stage.
|
|
||
| const viewLi = view.getChild( 0 ); | ||
| const viewLiIndented = view._removeChildren( 1, 1 ); // Array with one element. | ||
| viewLiIndented[ 0 ]._appendChild( parse( '<attribute:i>Baz</attribute:i>' ) ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't the problem here that we use appendChild() on a detached node? That breaks automatic markToSync() calls, am I right?
I have a bad feeling about this – should renderer handle such cases? Shouldn't it be able to assume that markToSync is called for all nodes which are finally in the tree? That seems much easier than having markToSync used for half of the nodes in the tree.
cc @pjasiun
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, but it is View class who binds the view structure and the renderer. I think that render should be tested together with the view and even with the view writer. Integration tests FTW! ;)
| @@ -1683,6 +1683,36 @@ describe( 'Renderer', () => { | |||
| ); | |||
| } ); | |||
|
|
|||
| // #1451 | |||
| it( 'should correctly render changed children even if direct parent is not marked to sync', () => { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test is a bit too hard to read. Better variable naming + a comment what's happening inside it would help.
Reinmar
force-pushed
the
t/1451-2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9fb3384
to
fde5971
Compare
|
I extracted the issue I found to https://github.com/ckeditor/ckeditor5-engine/issues/1456. Let's fix CC here and move forward because what we found is that we need to redesign this part of the engine :D |
Suggested merge commit message (convention)
Internal: Added
withChildren: falseparameter missing after refactoring and unit test covering that case. Closes ckeditor/ckeditor5#4370. Closes #1452.Additional information
What happens depending on
withChildrenvalue is described in more details in https://github.com/ckeditor/ckeditor5-engine/issues/1451#issuecomment-401356437. Added unit test shows the situation in whichwithChildren: truebehaviour results in incorrect DOM structure after rendering.I have added
Closes ckeditor/ckeditor5#4353as #1452 is a previous PR related to this topic, so if we decided to merge this one, #1452 should be closed.