Block Grid Editor

[nielslyngsoe]

New Property Editor added to Backoffice.
This is based on the concept and feedback from #12578
This contains the Property Editor, Razor Rendering Method, A Layout Stylesheet, Example Blocks, and much more.

Please read the Documentation PR for more info:
umbraco/UmbracoDocs#4398

[bjarnef]

@nielslyngsoe should SettingsUdi and Settings be nullable?

[nielslyngsoe]

I would say yes, but lets see what @kjac says about that :-)

[kjac]

Ideally yes - it would make a lot of sense, since the settings data might not be there. However, Settings are defined in the interface IBlockReference<TSettings> as not nullable, and that interface is shared between BlockGridItem and BlockListItem. In other words we'd introduce a breaking change for block list on BlockListItem, which is not entirely ideal at this point.

[bjarnef]

It should be a bit faster to use Length here instead of any since it already knows the size of the array, while Any() iterate first element to check if there is any items (at least one) in the collection.

if (areas?.Length == 0)

[bergmania]

It's not completely true.. Any() checks if the type implements ICollection and if so, it uses the known count.

There of cause is an overhead, but I'm not sure if it is worth if, compared to readability.

Below is the implementation of Any() from System.Linq

public static bool Any<TSource>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source)
{
    if (source == null)
    {
        ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentNullException(ExceptionArgument.source);
    }

    if (source is ICollection<TSource> collectionoft)
    {
        return collectionoft.Count != 0;
    }
    else if (source is IIListProvider<TSource> listProv)
    {
        // Note that this check differs from the corresponding check in
        // Count (whereas otherwise this method parallels it).  If the count
        // can't be retrieved cheaply, that likely means we'd need to iterate
        // through the entire sequence in order to get the count, and in that
        // case, we'll generally be better off falling through to the logic
        // below that only enumerates at most a single element.
        int count = listProv.GetCount(onlyIfCheap: true);
        if (count >= 0)
        {
            return count != 0;
        }
    }
    else if (source is ICollection collection)
    {
        return collection.Count != 0;
    }

    using (IEnumerator<TSource> e = source.GetEnumerator())
    {
        return e.MoveNext();
    }
}

[bjarnef]

@bergmania okay, I think I have seende a similar explanation before regarding collections of type IList, ICollection etc.. but generally with enumerable collections it would perform a letter better.

Personally I prefer using Length or Count properties when I need to check whether there's no elements or at least one element.

It seems Array implements ICollection as well https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.array?redirectedfrom=MSDN&view=net-6.0

[kjac]

Also remember that areas?.Length == 0 fails if areas is null, where areas?.Any() != true succeeds for areas being both null and empty. The equivalent using Length would be areas == null || areas.Length == 0, and I do belive that areas?.Any() != true is better for readability.

[bjarnef]

@kjac yes, you're right. Mostly I use the ?.Count > 0 approach.

Some implements HasAny() or IsEmpty() extention method to handle both null and empty collections, but it may collide with extension methods in other libraries, so not sure if it makes things simpler in Umbraco core.

[Zeegaan]

Just a single comment this time around, everything else looks great 👍

[Zeegaan]

C# part LGTM 💪