Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use single-property observer to deal better with if=undefined. Fixes #1742 #1947

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 24, 2015

Conversation

kevinpschaaf
Copy link
Member

This takes advantage of the fact that single property observers are called for each change (including undefined), whereas multi-property observers wait for all properties to be defined. Since the side-effect of the observe is to queue an async render, there is no real benefit from this being a multi-property observer. #1946 is open to track a more general fix for this issue.

…1742

This takes advantage of the fact that single property observers are called for each change (including undefined), whereas multi-property observers wait for all properties to be defined.  Since the side-effect of the observe is to queue an async render, there is no real benefit from this being a multi-property observer.  #1946 is open to track a more general fix for this issue.
@kevinpschaaf kevinpschaaf changed the title Use single-property observer to deal better with if=undefined. Fixes … Use single-property observer to deal better with if=undefined. Fixes #1742 Jun 24, 2015
@sorvell
Copy link
Contributor

sorvell commented Jun 24, 2015

Needs a test.

@sorvell
Copy link
Contributor

sorvell commented Jun 24, 2015

LGTM

sorvell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2015
Use single-property observer to deal better with if=undefined. Fixes #1742
@sorvell sorvell merged commit ad81e44 into master Jun 24, 2015
@sorvell sorvell deleted the 1742-domif-kschaaf branch June 24, 2015 23:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants