A temporary check is in place to determine whether a key in an object
literal needs to be quoted during emit. Previously, only the presence of
a dash caused a key to become quoted, this however is not sufficient for
@angular/flex-layout to compile properly as it has dots in its inputs.
This commit extends the check to also use quotes when a dot is present.
Fixes#30114
PR Close#31146
Currently each property binding generates an instruction like this:
```
property('prop1', ctx.value1);
property('prop2', ctx.value2);
```
The problem is that we're repeating the call to `property` for each of the properties. Since the `property` instruction returns itself, we can chain all of the calls which is more compact and it looks like this:
```
property('prop1', ctx.value1)('prop2', ctx.value2);
```
These changes implement the chaining behavior for regular property bindings and for synthetic ones, however interpolated ones are still handled like before, because they use a separate instruction.
This PR resolves FW-1389.
PR Close#31078
i18nExp now uses `bind` internally rather than having the compiler generate it in order to bring it in line with other functions like `textBinding` & `property`.
FW-1384 #resolve
PR Close#31089
Commit 58be2ff884 has been created
before c0386757b1 landed, and therefore
the newly created compliance test was using an outdated expectation.
This commit updates the compliance test to no longer contain
the outdated expectation.
PR Close#30983
To provide some context: The implicit receiver is part of the
parsed Angular template AST. Any property reads in bindings,
interpolations etc. read from a given object (usually the component
instance). In that case there is an _implicit_ receiver which can also
be specified explicitly by just using `this`.
e.g.
```html
<ng-template>{{this.myProperty}}</ng-template>
```
This works as expected in Ivy and View Engine, but breaks in case the
implicit receiver is not used for property reads. For example:
```html
<my-dir [myFn]="greetFn.bind(this)"></my-dir>
```
In that case the `this` will not be properly translated into the generated
template function code because the Ivy compiler currently always treats
the `ctx` variable as the implicit receiver. This is **not correct** and breaks
compatibility with View Engine. Rather we need to ensure that we retrieve
the root context for the standalone implicit receiver similar to how it works
for property reads (as seen in the example above with `this.myProperty`)
Note that this requires some small changes to the `expression_converter`
because we only want to generate the `eenextContent()` instruction if the
implicit receiver is _actually_ used/needed. View Engine determines if that is the case by recursively walking through the converted output AST and
checking for usages of the `o.variable('_co')` variable ([see here][ve_check]). This would work too for Ivy, but involves most likely more code duplication
since templates are isolated in different functions and it another pass
through the output AST for every template expression.
[ve_check]: https://github.com/angular/angular/blob/0d6c9d36a174f7dc6eb1029e459beecc2dfb0026/packages/compiler/src/view_compiler/view_compiler.ts#L206-L208
Resolves FW-1366.
PR Close#30897
- Refactors compiler to stop generating `ɵɵselect(0)` instructions
- Alters template execution to always call the equivalent of `ɵɵselect(0)` before running a template in update mode
- Updates tests to not check for or call `ɵɵselect(0)`.
The goal here is to reduce the size of generated templates
PR Close#30830
Fixes Ivy throwing an error if it runs into an empty property binding on an `ng-template` (e.g. `<ng-template [something]=""></ng-template>`) by not generating an update instruction for it.
Fixes#30801.
This PR resoves FW-1356.
PR Close#30829
- Removes ɵɵelementProperty instruction
- Updates tests that were using it
- NOTE: There is one test under `render3/integration_spec.ts` that is commented out, and needs to be reviewed. Basically, I could not find a good why to test what it was doing, because it was doing things that I am not sure we could generate in an acceptance test.
PR Close#30645
With View engine it was possible to declare multiple projection
definitions and to programmatically project nodes into the slots.
e.g.
```html
<ng-content></ng-content>
<ng-content></ng-content>
```
Using `ViewContainerRef#createComponent` allowed projecting
nodes into one of the projection defs (through index)
This no longer works with Ivy as the `projectionDef` instruction only
retrieves a list of selectors instead of also retrieving entries for
reserved projection slots which appear when using the default
selector multiple times (as seen above).
In order to fix this issue, the Ivy compiler now passes all
projection slots to the `projectionDef` instruction. Meaning that
there can be multiple projection slots with the same wildcard
selector. This allows multi-slot projection as seen in the
example above, and it also allows us to match the multi-slot node
projection order from View Engine (to avoid breaking changes).
It basically ensures that Ivy fully matches the View Engine behavior
except of a very small edge case that has already been discussed
in FW-886 (with the conclusion of working as intended).
Read more here: https://hackmd.io/s/Sy2kQlgTE
PR Close#30561
`i18nAttributes` instructions always occur after the element instruction. This means that we need to treat `i18n-` attributes differently.
By defining a specific `AttributeMarker` we can ensure that we won't trigger directive inputs with untranslated attribute values.
FW-1332 #resolve
PR Close#30402
Changed runtime i18n to define attributes with bindings, or matching directive inputs/outputs as element properties as we are supposed to do in Angular.
This PR fixes the issue where directive inputs wouldn't be trigged.
FW-1315 #resolve
PR Close#30402
The R3TargetBinder "binds" an Angular template AST, computing semantic
information regarding the template and making it accessible.
One of the binding passes previously had a bug, where for the following
template:
<div *ngIf="foo as foo"></div>
which desugars to:
<ng-template ngIf [ngIf]="foo" let-foo="ngIf">
<div></div>
</ng-template>
would have the `[ngIf]` binding processed twice - in both the scope which
contains the `<ng-template>` and the scope inside the template. The bug
arises because during the latter, `foo` is a variable defined by `let-foo`,
and so the R3TargetBinder would incorrectly learn that `foo` inside `[ngIf]`
maps to that variable.
This commit fixes the bug by only processing inputs, outputs, and
templateAttrs from `Template`s in the outer scope.
PR Close#30669
Prior to this commit there were no explicit types setup for NgModuleFactory calls in ngfactories, so TypeScript inferred the type based on a given call. In some cases (when generic types were used for Components/Directives) that turned out to be problematic, so we add explicit typing for NgModuleFactory calls.
PR Close#30708
This patch is one of the final patches to refactor the styling algorithm
to be more efficient, performant and less complex.
This patch enables sanitization support for map-based and prop-based
style bindings.
PR Close#30667
Prior to this change we processed binding expression (including bindings with pipes) in i18n attributes before we generate update instruction. As a result, slot offsets for pipeBind instructions were calculated incorrectly. Now we perform binding expression processing when we generate "update block" instructions, so offsets are calculated correctly.
PR Close#30573
Currently the `@angular/compiler-cli` compliance tests sometimes do
not throw an exception if the expected output does not match the
generated JavaScript output. This can happen for the following cases:
1. Expected code includes character that is not part of known alphabet
(e.g. `Δ` is still used in a new compliance test after rebasing a PR)
2. Expected code asserts that a string literal matches a string with
escaped quotes. e.g. expects `const $var$ = "\"quoted\"";`)
PR Close#30597
There is an encoding issue with using delta `Δ`, where the browser will attempt to detect the file encoding if the character set is not explicitly declared on a `<script/>` tag, and Chrome will find the `Δ` character and decide it is window-1252 encoding, which misinterprets the `Δ` character to be some other character that is not a valid JS identifier character
So back to the frog eyes we go.
```
__
/ɵɵ\
( -- ) - I am ineffable. I am forever.
_/ \_
/ \ / \
== == ==
```
PR Close#30546
Previously we defensively wrapped expressions in case they ran afoul of
precedence rules. For example, it would be easy to create the TS AST structure
Call(Ternary(a, b, c)), but might result in printed code of:
```
a ? b : c()
```
Whereas the actual structure we meant to generate is:
```
(a ? b : c)()
```
However the TypeScript renderer appears to be clever enough to provide
parenthesis as necessary.
This commit removes these defensive paraenthesis in the cases of binary
and ternary operations.
FW-1273
PR Close#30349
A structural directive can specify a template guard for an input, such that
the type of that input's binding can be narrowed based on the guard's return
type. Previously, such template guards could only be methods, of which an
invocation would be inserted into the type-check block (TCB). For `NgIf`,
the template guard narrowed the type of its expression to be `NonNullable`
using the following declaration:
```typescript
export declare class NgIf {
static ngTemplateGuard_ngIf<E>(dir: NgIf, expr: E): expr is NonNullable<E>
}
```
This works fine for usages such as `*ngIf="person"` but starts to introduce
false-positives when e.g. an explicit non-null check like
`*ngIf="person !== null"` is used, as the method invocation in the TCB
would not have the desired effect of narrowing `person` to become
non-nullable:
```typescript
if (NgIf.ngTemplateGuard_ngIf(directive, ctx.person !== null)) {
// Usages of `ctx.person` within this block would
// not have been narrowed to be non-nullable.
}
```
This commit introduces a new strategy for template guards to allow for the
binding expression itself to be used as template guard in the TCB. Now,
the TCB generated for `*ngIf="person !== null"` would look as follows:
```typescript
if (ctx.person !== null) {
// This time `ctx.person` will successfully have
// been narrowed to be non-nullable.
}
```
This strategy can be activated by declaring the template guard as a
property declaration with `'binding'` as literal return type.
See #30235 for an example where this led to a false positive.
PR Close#30248
JoostK
crisbeto
Alex Eagle
Olivier Combe
Paul Gschwendtner
Ben Lesh
Alex Rickabaugh
Andrew Kushnir
Matias Niemelä
Kara Erickson
janith
Pete Bacon Darwin