refactor(select): decouple hlm from brn #253
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
PR Checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
guidelines: https://github.com/goetzrobin/spartan/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#-commit-message-guidelines
PR Type
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Which package are you modifying?
What is the current behavior?
Closes #252
What is the new behavior?
Decouple
hlmfrombrn. There should be no mention ofhlminsidebrn. Otherwise it would be a logical circularity.I think that
brnin general should contain no components, otherwise it is taking away control over the final component library from developers.IMHO,
brnshould be a set of directives and helpers to build up a component library - something along the lines of a cdk. I think that less logic inbrnand more logic inhlmis a good thing as it gives developers the most control. But is also more error-prone in case of future updates. Not sure what the best course of action here is, alhtough I tend to think that more code in developer's codebases is a good thing (because it gives more control).Anyway back to the PR:
What I'm unhappy about with the current solution is the fact that I had to make
updateArrowDisplayan async function because it needs to access theviewportElementRef, which is now passed to the directive through a signal.Happy to hear suggestions for a cleaner solution for this.
In general I tried to leave as much code as possible inside the brn directives, although again I'm wondering how much UI-related logic should live inside brn (again, imho, none or as little as necessary - although I'm having trouble defining what necessary in this case means).
Also, I didn't touch the tests and generators yet. Once we're happy with the changes I will get to it, too.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
hlmcomponents need to be regenerated, but otherwise the API stays the same (as long asbrnisn't mentioned in the final code)Other information