-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 127
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
Add full functionality of classnames
package to classList
#88
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
I've been slow on this one (and it has come up before) mostly in that we need to apply the support in at least 4 places including client and server side compiler and runtimes. For the most part I skip using these helpers if the compiler can analyze what we need(ie.. if it is a literal in the binding we know that it's fixed if there are no spreads or no computed properties). But unclear if this array form can apply the same compiler level optimization. Probably if we inline a conditional. Like right now I don't optimize One thing I wasn't clear about on this part of the solution was does it handle unsetting properly and with arrays do we have to consider order? Like if someone passed in |
Hmm I'm not familiar with how the compiler handles classList, can you please point me in the right direction?
Regarding order, I'm not sure if I understand the issue, but this current solution uses existing functionality that clears and rewrites the dom classList which should work regardless of order. |
for (i = 0, len = prevKeys.length; i < len; i++) { | ||
const key = prevKeys[i]; | ||
if (!key || key === "undefined" || key in value) continue; | ||
toggleClassKey(node, key, false); | ||
delete prev[key]; | ||
} |
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.
This loop compares prev keys that and if they are missing from the value it unsets them. I'm gathering we need to update to support objects in arrays.
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.
Oh mb, missed the key in value
, I have a couple of solutions in mind. First I'm thinking the simplest way to achieve this is to just wipe them all and rebuild them. At first that sounds like it would have poor performance, but I think its unlikely developers will be setting enough classnames to make this significant, even on several components. Another option would be to track present classes with setClasses, and remove all other classes.
I'll draft up these 2 scenarios so you'll have some more context.
for (i = 0, len = prevKeys.length; i < len; i++) { | ||
const key = prevKeys[i]; | ||
if (!key || key === "undefined" || key in value) continue; | ||
toggleClassKey(node, key, false); | ||
delete prev[key]; | ||
} |
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.
Scenario 1, wipe all classes. These will be rebuilt in setClasses
for (i = 0, len = prevKeys.length; i < len; i++) { | |
const key = prevKeys[i]; | |
if (!key || key === "undefined" || key in value) continue; | |
toggleClassKey(node, key, false); | |
delete prev[key]; | |
} | |
for (const key of Object.keys(prev)) { | |
toggleClassKey(node, key, false); | |
delete prev[key]; | |
} |
(function setClasses(classes) { | ||
if (classes instanceof Array) { | ||
for (const key of classes) { | ||
// classList setting classes for all numbers except for 0 may be | ||
// unexpected behavior, you must explicity omit 0 using `n || false` | ||
if (!key && key !== 0) continue; | ||
if (typeof key === 'object') { // Both objects and arrays | ||
setClasses(key); | ||
continue; | ||
} | ||
toggleClassKey(node, key, true); | ||
prev[key] = true; | ||
} | ||
} else if (typeof classes === 'object') { | ||
for (const [key, enabled] of Object.entries(classes)) { | ||
if (!enabled) continue; | ||
toggleClassKey(node, key, true); | ||
prev[key] = true | ||
} | ||
} | ||
})(value); | ||
|
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.
Scenario 2, track classes & remove absent
(function setClasses(classes) { | |
if (classes instanceof Array) { | |
for (const key of classes) { | |
// classList setting classes for all numbers except for 0 may be | |
// unexpected behavior, you must explicity omit 0 using `n || false` | |
if (!key && key !== 0) continue; | |
if (typeof key === 'object') { // Both objects and arrays | |
setClasses(key); | |
continue; | |
} | |
toggleClassKey(node, key, true); | |
prev[key] = true; | |
} | |
} else if (typeof classes === 'object') { | |
for (const [key, enabled] of Object.entries(classes)) { | |
if (!enabled) continue; | |
toggleClassKey(node, key, true); | |
prev[key] = true | |
} | |
} | |
})(value); | |
const present = new Set(); | |
(function setClasses(classes) { | |
if (classes instanceof Array) { | |
for (const key of classes) { | |
// classList setting classes for all numbers except for 0 may be | |
// unexpected behavior, you must explicity omit 0 using `n || false` | |
if (!key && key !== 0) continue; | |
if (typeof key === 'object') { // Both objects and arrays | |
setClasses(key); | |
continue; | |
} | |
toggleClassKey(node, key, true); | |
prev[key] = true; | |
present.add(key); | |
} | |
} else if (typeof classes === 'object') { | |
for (const [key, enabled] of Object.entries(classes)) { | |
if (!enabled) continue; | |
toggleClassKey(node, key, true); | |
prev[key] = true | |
present.add(key); | |
} | |
} | |
})(value); | |
for(const key of Object.keys(prev)) { | |
if(!present.has(key)) { | |
toggleClassKey(node, key, false); | |
delete prev[key]; | |
} | |
} |
also delete this snippet
for (i = 0, len = classKeys.length; i < len; i++) {
const key = classKeys[i],
classValue = !!value[key];
if (!key || key === "undefined" || prev[key] === classValue) continue;
toggleClassKey(node, key, classValue);
prev[key] = classValue;
}
Now that I write these 2 scenarios down, the first one seems to me like the way to go, I don't imagine the second will have any significant performance benefit, but it does add plenty of complexity |
Hi, are there any updates on this? |
Recently discovered solid and I am toying around with porting an UI framework https://stackblitz.com/edit/solidjs-templates-gfcotu Solid has
class={classNames(
Classes.COLLAPSE,
{
[Classes.COLLAPSE_OPEN]: props.isOpen,
[Classes.COLLAPSE_CLOSE]: !props.isOpen,
},
props.class
)} if classList={{
[Classes.COLLAPSE]: true,
[Classes.COLLAPSE_OPEN]: props.isOpen,
[Classes.COLLAPSE_CLOSE]: !props.isOpen,
[props.class || ""]: true
}} Would really appreciate this PR being given considerations, other discussions |
This allows classList to accept an array of classNames, omitting falsey values (except for 0, reasoning described in comment).
This will allow users to put optional classNames in className, and not have to worry about omitting an unset value. The following shows the common usecase of passing through a classname:
This is fully backwards compatible and accepts objects & nested arrays: