`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
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
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
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
@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
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
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 add an option to the `extendedDiagnostics` field that allows the check from #53190 to be disabled. This is a follow-up based on a recent discussion.
PR Close#53387
This is a follow-up to the fix from #52414. It adds a diagnostic that will tell users when a control flow is preventing its direct descendants from being projected into a specific component slot.
PR Close#53387
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
Add support for i18n attributes:
- Generate i18n contexts from i18n attributes, and extract the eventual messages into the constant pool.
- Emit I18nAttributes config instructions when needed.
- Use the generated i18n variable in the appropriate places, including extracted attribute instructions, as well as I18nAttributes config arrays.
PR Close#53341
Currently we generate the following TCB for a `@for` loop:
```ts
// @for (item of items; track item) {...}
for (const item of this.items) {
var _t1 = item;
// Do things with `_t1`
}
```
This is problematic if the item name is the same as a global variable (e.g. `document`), because when the TCB has references to that variable (e.g. `document.createElement`), it'll find the loop initializer instead of the global variable.
These changes fix the issue by generating the following instead:
```ts
for (const _t1 of this.items) {
// Do things with `_t1`
}
```
Fixes#53293.
PR Close#53319
Previously we recorded separate param values for a strucural directive
and the element tag it goes on. We then later attempted to combine those
into a single value. However in some cases this merging logic matched
the directive with the wrong tag.
This change implements an alternate approach where we match the
directive to its element tag from the start, while we're traversing the
ops. This should be a more robust solution.
PR Close#53327
We previously failed to populate the attributes property on projection
ops, this commit populates it and later strips out the "select"
attribute.
PR Close#53327
Previously we failed to reset the sub-template index counter when we
exited a root block. This caused following sibling blocks to start
counting at the wrong index.
PR Close#53327
It is possible for ICUs to be nested inside other ICUs. This change
adjusts our ingestion logic to create extra interpolation ops for the
nested ICUs during ingestion.
PR Close#53300
We previously had an assertion that every placeholder in the i18n AST
had a corresponding param in the output. However, there are some cases
such as interpolations nested inside ICUs where this assertion is not
true. This change simply removes the asserion.
PR Close#53300
ICUs may share a placeholder, and in that case they need special
post-processing. This change adds logic to cover this possibility. In
particular, we set the param to a special placeholder value and then
pass an array containing the sub-message variables as a post-processing
param.
PR Close#53300
When we re-assign the slot dependencies for the i18nExprs, we should
move them down below the other ops that target their same slot. This
keeps the behavior consistent with TDB
PR Close#53300
This commit fixes an issue where having an expression with nullish coalescing in styling host bindings leads to JS errors due to the fact that a declaration for a temporary variable was not included into the generated code.
Resolves#53295.
PR Close#53305
As part of this fix, I realized that child i18n blocks don't need their
own context. Instead, we can just add their params directly to the
context for their root block, and forgo the step of merging the contexts.
PR Close#53209
ICU sub-messages should be recorded as belonging to the message for the
root i18n block they are part of. This ensures that they still get
emitted even if they are nested in a child template.
PR Close#53209
Adds support for inheriting host directives from the parent class. This is consistent with how we inherit other features like host bindings.
Fixes#51203.
PR Close#52992
Dylan Hunn