-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 113
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
Fiber Reconciler fixes #525
Conversation
I don't recall specifically, but the |
Tested on a small project and didn't notice any regressions. |
I finally found some time and started refactoring There is still an issue with label content not being updated tho, which I'm going to look into next. |
Fixed the stale label content as well. The only issue left that I am aware of is the I also changed the test renderer so that multiple changed fibers get batched like they do in real renderers. Without that, the test was kind of flaky and would randomly succeed or fail (before adding the part to reproduce the remove bug, that is). |
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.
Very nice improvements, thank you. I used it on a test project of mine and it worked well.
Package.swift
Outdated
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ let package = Package( | |||
name: "TokamakDemo", | |||
targets: ["TokamakDemo"] | |||
), | |||
.executable(name: "RecRep", targets: ["RecRep"]), |
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.
I'm not sure we should have this executable as part of the Tokamak package. It seems you have already adapted it to a test case, which should be enough.
print(""" | ||
reconcile done | ||
mutations were: | ||
\(visitor.mutations.map { " \($0)" }.joined(separator: "\n")) | ||
alternate is \(self.alternate.recursiveDescription) | ||
current is \(current.recursiveDescription) | ||
""") |
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.
Can you clean up any print statements before merging? Better debug logging could be tackled in a separate PR.
|
||
invalidateCache(for: fiber, in: reconciler, caches: caches) | ||
|
||
switch (fiber.element, node.newContent, fiber.alternate?.element) { |
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.
Very nice improvement here!
if let p = fiber.elementParent { caches.elementIndices[ObjectIdentifier(p)]? -= 1 } | ||
return .remove(element: alt, parent: parent) | ||
|
||
case let (element?, content, _) where fiber.alternate?.element == nil: |
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.
Couldn't this be written as:
case let (element?, content, _) where fiber.alternate?.element == nil: | |
case let (element?, content, nil): |
superseeded by #542 |
This is what I have done so far to make the example (with a little modification) from #523 work.
Currently, things work until returning to the initial state, after which pressing the button will leave an empty screen.
Some comments in no particular order:
ReconcilePass.reconcile(_: , in:, caches:)
obviously still needs to be refactored.remove
mutation is emitted with the wrongparent
. TheDOMRenderer
doesn't use the parent, so it's not an issue there, but it does materialize with the test renderer.