We generate `advance` instructions before most update instructions and the majority of `advance` calls are advancing by one. We can save some bytes for the most common case by omitting the parameter for `advance(1)` altogether.
PR Close#53845
In #52931, Kristiyan fixed a TemplateDefinitionBuilder bug in which derived alias variables in for loops (`$even`, `$first`, etc) were referring to the wrong level of nested `@for` block. (These variables are unique because they become inlined expressions, and are not "real" context variables.) He fixed this by appending level information to the generated alias name.
Template Pipeline actually suffered from the same bug. We fix it in a very similar way -- in particular, whenever these derived context variables are used, we make them depend on versions of `$index` and `$count` that have been suffixed with the xref of the enclosing repeater.
I have added a few more pipeline goldens, because we are not quite as clever as TDB about only generating the duplicate suffixed index and count variables when inside nested loops. This is fine, since in the long run, we want to refactor it more fundamentally.
I have also added a TODO to fix this more rigorously. In particular, it would be nice if we had proper support for shadowed variables, as well as unlimited levels of variables depending on one another.
PR Close#53662
Template pipeline previously mangled CSS property names like
`--camelCase` when used in host style bindings. Note: It still *does*
mangle these names in static style attrs, both in host bindings and on
elements. This is clearly wrong, but is consistent with what TDB does
today.
PR Close#53665
It's possible for attributes to have a namespace, we need to handle this
possiblity for both attribute instructions and attributes extracted to
the consts array.
PR Close#53646
The way we were handling ICU placeholders was not compatible with using
interpolations on attributes of elements inside the ICU. This change
refactors the handling of ICU placeholders and unifies the way
expression and tag placeholders work inside ICUs.
The new approach modifies the ingest logic to add the placeholder on to
the TextOp rather than the TextInterpolationOp. This is because, in
ICUs, we may need multiple i18n expressions created from the
interpolation expressions to roll up into the same placeholder. ICUs
essentially do the interpolation at compile time, combining the static
strings with special placeholder strings that represent the expression
values.
PR Close#53643
It's possible for the user to create a host attrbiute binding with a
name that makes it _look_ like a class binding `{['class.foo']: ''}`, we
were previously treating these as actual class property bindings. This
change fixes the logic so that only true property bindings cam be
converted to class property bindings.
Note: A user who added an attribute like the above almost certainly
intended to create an actual class property binding. It would be nice if
we could add a diagnostic to warn them about this.
PR Close#53626
Further refine the template pipeline's behavior w.r.t. duplicate values
in the consts array to better align its behavior with TDB. In particular
this means allowing duplicate values for classes and styles.
PR Close#53596
Adds a test for handling of duplicate bindings. Fow now we replicate the
TDB behavior in template pipeline, which is: For style and class text
attributes, only keep the last one. For all other text attributes, add
all of the values to the consts array.
PR Close#53596
The for loop tracking function doesn't allow references to local template variables, aside from `$index` and the item which are passed in as parameters. We enforce this by rewriting all variable references to the components scope.
The problem is that the logic that rewrites the references first walks the view tree and then checks if the variable is `$index` or the item. This is problematic in nested for loops, because it'll find the `$index` of the parent.
These changes resolve the issue by checking for `$index` and the item first.
Fixes#53600.
PR Close#53604
Changes template pipeline to be less aggressive in const collecting
attrs, to match the behavior of template definition builder. There is
nothing wrong with the more aggressive const collection, and in fact it
would be good to re-enable it later, but for now this makes it easier to
transition from TDB to template pipeline.
Also adds a test to verify that sensitive iframe attributes are properly
validated.
PR Close#53580
TemplateDefinitionBuilder is apparently more careful about when it attempts to split namespaces in attribute values. However, we are doing this on style attributes, which might start with a single `:`. Rather than refactor our logic to only try to split namespaces in some cases, we can just add an option to make namespace splitting fail gracefully. We only use this option for attributes, not elements.
Note also: the compiled code for this, while "correct" is absolutely insane. Maybe we should consider fixing this, as a matter of principle.
PR Close#53574
Some elements may have multiple bindings with the same name. We should accept and emit them all, as long as they have different kinds.
Co-authored-by: Miles Malerba <mmalerba@users.noreply.github.com>
PR Close#53574
The template pipeline was previously not reserving a variable slot for the result of the `deferWhen` instruction, which caused the `defer when` feature to crash at runtime.
PR Close#53574
When an element is self-closing, it will cause an `element` instruction to be emitted (instead of `elementStart`/`elementEnd`). In that case, we should use map whole source span for the instruction, not just the starting span.
PR Close#53574
The template pipeline was producing slightly different names than TemplateDefinitionBuilder for defer deps functions. I have added a workaround in the name of backwards compatibility, to avoid suffixing the const pool function names.
PR Close#53574
Previously when we found an ICU that was the only translatable content
in its i18n block, we assigned the block's i18n context to the ICU.
However, we neglected to set the contextKind to inidcate that the
context was associated with an ICU. As of this change we now set the
correct contextKind.
This change also refactors the context creation to explicitly separate
creation of contexts for attributes, root i18n blocks, child i18n
blocks, and ICUs. This allows us to more easily ensure that contexts are
shared appropriately between i18n blocks and ICUs.
Finally, this change also refactors the i18n message extraction pahse to
simplify how contexts are converted to i18n messages. This
simplification should make it easier to merge i18n contexts and i18n
messages into a single op in a future refactor.
PR Close#53557
`o.WrappedNodeExpr` can show up in some cases, when a host binding's value is inside a TS expression.
It's an open question whether we will need to support all of the TS expression types as a result.
PR Close#53478
For some reason, the parser reuses the same field to store the animation phase and the event target. We were incorrectly interpreting the presence of any value on that field as an animation phase, leading us to incorrectly emit synthetic listener instructions for listeners on events with targets. This bug is now fixes.
PR Close#53478
`$any` should be interpreted as a cast, not as a context read of a variable called `$any`. This already worked in template compilations, but the relevant phase was not enabled for host bindings.
PR Close#53478
Adds support for sanitizing host bindings. Since the tag name of the
element the host binding is being set on isn't always known, we have to
consider multiple possible security contexts.
This commit also adds additional tests to help verify correct behavior
of the sanitization logic for different edge cases.
PR Close#53513
Previously we generated an intermediate expression which was later
converted into a symbol import expression for the sanitizer function.
This commit simplifies the behavior by just generating the symbol import
from the beginning
PR Close#53473
Use the DomElementSchemaRegistry to determine the correct security
context for static attributes, and pass it along during ingestion. Then
during the resolve sanitizers phase, use the security context to
determine if a trusted value function is needed
PR Close#53473
Consider the case:
```
<button *ngIf="true" [@anim]="field"></button>
```
Only the inner `button` should recieve a `property` instruction for the animation binding. We were previously emitting one for the implicit `ng-template` as well, and collecting it into the consts for the `ng-template`. Both of these issues are now fixed.
PR Close#53457
The behavior of explicit bindings on `ng-template`s was untested, and we differed from `TemplateDefinitionBuilder` significantly. We now have much more similar behavior, although not 100% identical.
For example, consider this templarte:
```
<ng-template l="l1" [p]="p1" [attr.a]="a1" [class.c]="c1"></ng-template>
```
It's not clear what a class binding on an `ng-template` would actually do. Nonetheless, it's well-defined behavior in TemplateDefinitionBuilder, which emits `property` instructions for all three bindings, and people actually do this in google3.
Note that some of these bindings don't really make much sense, but we have to support them for compatibility purposes.
See comments for an in-depth explanation of all the logic.
Also, add a test to exercise the problematic case.
PR Close#53457
It turns out that `BindingFlags.BindingTargetsTemplate` is actally a redundant property! It will be true in either of the following cases:
1. The template is a normal non-structural `ng-template`. We already know this from `TemplateKind`.
2. The binding came from `templateAttrs` (instead of `attrs`). We have this information in `BindingFlags.IsStructuralTemplateAttribute`.
Therefore, I can just eliminate `BindingFlags.BindingTargetsTemplate`. There's no reason to keep `BindingFlags` around for a single value, so I convert `BindingFlags.IsStructuralTemplateAttribute` to a boolean parameter (with the eventual goal of eliminating it entirely).
Additionally, because element binding ingestion now calls `ir.createBindingOp` inline, it was difficult to compare it to template binding ingestion, which uses the `createTemplateBinding` helper. I have changed the parameter order of `createTemplateBinding` to closely mimic `ir.createBindingOp`. This will both make the code easier to read, and allow me to easily replace one with the other in the future.
Lastly: the template binding ingestion function is the site of much of the binding ingestion complexity. Add an explanatory function comment.
PR Close#53457
Previously, we had `ingestBindings` and `ingestBinding`, which required tons of cases to support both elements and templates.
Now, we have two separate functions, `ingestElementBindings` and `ingestTemplateBindings`.
Thanks to the previous refactoring work, `ingestBinding` is now extremely compact. In fact, it's so compact that, in the elements case, it can just be inlined! Therefore, element binding ingestion is now quite easy to read.
The template case continues to be pretty gnarly, although I have already removed some code. In subsequent commits, we will simplify it even further.
PR Close#53457
Currently Template Pipeline's ingest phase is very complex, especially when it comes to ingesting bindings.
In this commit, we make some superficial simplifications, in preparation for a larger refactoring. For example, we pull out common code such as `convertAstWithInterpolation` and the `i18n.Message` checks. This enormously shrinks the main binding ingestion functions.
In addition, we reorder the binding kind and flags code above `ingestBindings`, so that `ingestBindings` and `ingestBinding` can be viewed together.
PR Close#53457
The Template Pipeline has had a number of tricky bugs involving bindings on structural elements.
Consider this template:
```
<div *ngIf="true" [class.bar]="field"></div>
```
We were incorrectly emitting `ɵɵclassProp` on *both* the template's view, and the inner view. The solution is to just emit an extracted attribute on the enclosing template, so it still shows up in the const array, but does not affect the update block.
We will refactor binding ingestion soon, but this commit improves our correctness before any big refactor.
PR Close#53457
Phases that walk through the views by following template and repeater
ops need to remember to check the empty view as well for repeaters. This
commit adds fixes for phases that were missing it, or comments
explaining why its not handled.
PR Close#53440
@for does not use actual TemplateOps, but instead has a similar
RepeaterCreateOp. This commit adds support for this op to the relevant
i18n phases.
PR Close#53440
Previously, binding ops only knew whether they applied to a structural template (and even this was actually very misleading!).
Now, binding ops have full information about what kind of template they apply to, if any (e.g. plain template, structural template, etc). Additionally, each binding knows whether it `IsStructuralTemplateAttribute`, which is a property of the binding rather than the template target.
In the future, we should refactor this to unify the various flags that can describe binding types, as well as the flags that describe template targets, into a single and comprehensive field on binding ops.
PR Close#53405
Previously, we created i18n contexts for i18n attributes in ingest. This turned out to be the wrong approach, because we don't always want to produce i18n messages for all i18n attributes! In fact, several kinds of i18n attributes on elements with structural directives should not produce their own messages.
This commit also contains related refactors to fix one such structural directives test.
PR Close#53405
When a binding is present on an element with a structural directive, that binding is parsed onto *both* the synthetic `ng-template`, as well as the inner element. However, we do not want to create different i18n messages for both bindings; we only want to generate a new i18n message for the inner, "real" element.
PR Close#53405
Listener instructions should not be inside the i18n block. In order to avoid this, we ingest bindings on an element before starting the i18n block.
We previously missed this case because almost all bindings result in *update* instructions, which don't need to be ordered relative to i18nStart/i18nEnd create instructions. However, listeners are the only kind of binding that gets ingested into the create block.
PR Close#53405
Previously, our i18n slot moving process was buggy. Specifically, it was not resilient to cases in which a create op consumed a slot, but no update ops depended on that slot.
The new algorithm fixes this issue, and is also easier to understand.
PR Close#53405
I18n expressions logically have both a target and an owner:
- For i18n text expressions, the owner is the i18nStart instruction. The target is initially the same, but later moves to be the last slot consumer in the i18n block.
- For i18n attribute expressions, the owner is the I18nAttributes config instruction, whereas the target is the ElementCreate that hosts the attribute.
This refactor makes the code clearer in quite a few plases.
Additionally, we now perform a lot of the i18n processing earlier. For example, re-targeting and re-ordering of i18n expressions happens *before* apply instructions are generated. As a result, the re-ordering logic is a lot simpler.
These changes also have consequences on i18n const collection, along with a couple other minor changes.
PR Close#53376
These changes expose the `ngContentSelectors` and `preserveWhitespaces` metadata to the TCB so they can be used in the next commit to implement a new diagnostic.
PR Close#53387
When doing directive matching in the compiler, we need to be able to create a selector from an AST node. We already have the utility, but these changes simplify the public API and expose it so it can be used in `compiler-cli`.
PR Close#53387
Kristiyan Kostadinov