The behavior of `ApplicationRef.isStable` changed in 16.1 due to
https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/28c68f709cdc930e12bac51a266e7bf790656034.
This change added a `share` to the `isStable` observable, which prevents
additional subscribers from getting a value until a new one emits. One
solution to the problem would be `shareReplay(1)`. However, that would
increase the bundle size since we do not use `shareReplay` elsewhere.
Instead, we don't even really need to share the observable.
The `Observable` available in `ApplicationRef.isStable` before the above commit
was the zone stable observable, without a `share`. The new behavior adds
only an additional observable to the stream, `hasPendingTasks` (a `BehaviorSubject`).
The observables in this stream are not expensive to subscribe to. The
only one with side effects is the `isStable` (because it subscribes to
onStable), but that one already has the `share` operator on it.
Omitting the `share` in `ApplicationRef` also means that applications on `zoneless` will not
have to pay the cost of the operator when we make zones optional because
the zone stable observable is the only place we use it.
PR Close#53541
Internationalization is whitespace sensitive. This change updates the formatting code to process for i18n attributes and prevent reformatting those sections of the template.
PR Close#53538
Using http://a as the base URL returns / instead of the actual base path when using the file:// protocol. Using document.baseURI addresses this.
Fixes#53546
PR Close#53547
This commit updates the name of the 'performance.mark'
counter used to track feature usage. It now matches
the name agreed upon by W3C for this use case:
https://github.com/w3c/user-timing/pull/108
PR Close#53542
This fix handles the common case where an ngswitch might have invalid syntax post migration. This is likely due to using elements other than case or default underneath the ngswitchcase. This will fail out of the migration for that file when these cases are detected with a useful console message.
fixes: #53234
PR Close#53530
In the case that a template has some sort of structural issue prior to migrating, like a tag that is not properly closed resulting in invalid HTML post migration, this will attempt to parse the html after migrating and revert to the original structure. An error during migration will be reported out instead.
PR Close#53530
`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
Fixes that the compiler was throwing an error if an ambient type is used inside of an input `transform` function. The problem was that the reference emitter was trying to write a reference to the ambient type's source file which isn't necessary.
Fixes#51424.
PR Close#51474
Prior to this commit when a route is not matched and the application was running in production mode an `[Error]: NG04002` was logged in the console. This however, is not actionable when the application is running on the server where there can be multiple pages being rendered at the same time.
Now we change this to also log the route example: `[Error]: NG04002: 'products/Jeep'`.
Closes#53522
PR Close#53523
The ops for the implicit variables in `@for` loops (e.g. `$index`) are marked as being mandatory which means that they're generated even if they aren't used. These changes make them optional so they're only added when necessary.
PR Close#53515
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
The formatting logic would eliminate all newlines in updated template code. This adds start and end markers for tracking when the formatter is in a block of template code that changed or not. It should leave behind any newlines that are outside of a migrated section.
fixes: #53494
PR Close#53508
When migrating a component and the associated external template, if errors occur, the component should not remove the common module imports. This fix should allow the application to still build in that instance.
PR Close#53502
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
The changes Observable (impl: EventEmitter) on the QueryList is initalized
lazy - it is created only if someone calls a geter to get a hand on its
instance. But the destroy method was calling this getter thus creating
a new Observable even if no one subscribed to it.
This commit changes the destroy logic to skip creation of an EventEmitter
if it wasn't initialized.
PR Close#53498
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
In the original `Promise` impelmentation, zone.js follow the spec from
https://promisesaplus.com/#point-51.
```
const p1 = Promise.resolve(1);
const p2 = Promise.resolve(p1);
p1 === p2; // false
```
in this case, `p2` should be the same status with `p1` but they are
still different instances.
And for some edge case.
```
class MyPromise extends Promise {
constructor(sub) {
super((res) => res(null));
this.sub = sub;
}
then(onFufilled, onRejected) {
this.sub.then(onFufilled, onRejected);
}
}
const p1 = new Promise(setTimeout(res), 100);
const myP = new MyPromise(p1);
const r = await myP;
r === 1; // false
```
So in the above code, `myP` is not the same instance with `p1`,
and since `myP` is resolved in constructor, so `await myP` will
just pass without waiting for `p1`.
And in the current `tc39` spec here https://tc39.es/ecma262/multipage/control-abstraction-objects.html#sec-promise-resolve
`Promise.resolve(subP)` should return `subP`.
```
const p1 = Promise.resolve(1);
const p2 = Promise.resolve(p1);
p1 === p2; // true
```
So the above `MyPromise` can wait for the `p1` correctly.
PR Close#53423
This change replaces the implementation of the multi-map used to store
detached views while reconciling lists. The new implementation optimizes
memory allocation for such map and avoid arrays allocation when there are
no duplicated keys.
PR Close#52245
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
When using ternaries or other expressions in bound if / else cases, it is possible that line breaks could end up affecting template replacement.
fixes: #53428
PR Close#53435
This separates application and platform code into even more files. This now removes
the ciruclar dependency between scheduling and application ref.
PR Close#53371
This test actually passes, template pipeline just orders the translated
messages and consts array differently. Since the order isn't important,
we just fork off an alternate golden file for template pipeline.
PR Close#53459
I discovered this failure while looking at presubmit results. We appear to still have ordering issues, when more update ops are present.
PR Close#53405
While running a g3 presubmit, I discovered two related novel failure modes:
1. Simple case: this new test uses an `ngFor` structural directive, which binds a context variable. That variable is immediately used in an attribute binding. It looks like we generate an extra attribute instruction, which might result in an invalid property read at runtime.
2. Complex case: this is another attribute binding, this time on a structural element, inside of an `ng-template`. Not sure what's going on here.
PR Close#53405
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
The PR https://github.com/angular/angular/pull/52465 introduced short-circuit for
the signal equality invocation - with the reasoning that the equality function
should never return false for arguments with the same references. In practice it
turned out that it is rather surprising and the subsequent PR
https://github.com/angular/angular/pull/52532 added a warning when the short-circuit
was taking priority over the equality function.
Still, the presence of the short-circuit prevents people from mutating objects in
place and based on https://github.com/angular/angular/issues/52735 this is a common
and desired scenario. This change removes the short-circuit altogether and thus
fixes the mentioned issue.
We do recognize that removing short-circuit exposes developers to the potentially
surprising logic where mutated in-place change won't be propagated throug the
reactivity graph (due to the deault equality function). But we assume that this might
be less surprising / more desirable as compared to the short-circuit logic.
Fixes#52735
PR Close#53446
This change fixes and issue where the expectation was that change
detection always goes through `detectChangesInView`. In reality,
`detectChangesInternal` directly calls `refreshView`
and refreshes a view directly without checking if it was dirty (to my discontent).
This update changes the implementation of `detectChangesInternal` to
actually be "detect changes" not "force refresh of root view and detect
changes". In addition, it adds the refresh flag to APIs that were
previously calling `detectChangesInternal` so we get the same behavior
as before (host view is forced to refresh).
Note that the use of `RefreshView` instead of `Dirty` is _intentional_
here. The `RefreshView` flag is cleared before refreshing the view while
the `Dirty` flag is cleared at the very end. Using the `Dirty` flag
could have consequences because it is a more long-lasting change to the
view flags. Because `detectChangesInView` will immediately clear the
`RefreshView` flag, this change is much more limited and does not
result in a different set of flags during the view refresh.
PR Close#53021
The component fixture dependencies have to be passed in manually. This
is a bit annoying to manage as we expand which dependencies are needed.
Instead, we can run the constructor in the TestBed injection context and
move the dependencies into the component fixture code, as is done with
other constructors in Angular.
PR Close#53400
Andrew Scott