[TreeView] Improve typing to support optional dependencies in plugins and in the item #13523
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
flaviendelangle
added
typescript
component: tree view
flaviendelangle
commented
Jun 18, 2024
| @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ type TreeViewLogExpandedSignature = TreeViewPluginSignature<{ | |||
| // The parameters of this plugin as they are passed to the plugin after calling `plugin.getDefaultizedParams` | |||
| defaultizedParams: TreeViewLogExpandedDefaultizedParameters; | |||
| // Dependencies of this plugin (we need the expansion plugin to access its model) | |||
| dependantPlugins: [UseTreeViewExpansionSignature]; | |||
| dependencies: [UseTreeViewExpansionSignature]; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted to do this renaming for a long time 😆
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah yes, this is a relief 🙈
6 tasks
|
Deploy preview: https://deploy-preview-13523--material-ui-x.netlify.app/ Updated pages: |
noraleonte
approved these changes
Jun 18, 2024
| @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ type TreeViewLogExpandedSignature = TreeViewPluginSignature<{ | |||
| // The parameters of this plugin as they are passed to the plugin after calling `plugin.getDefaultizedParams` | |||
| defaultizedParams: TreeViewLogExpandedDefaultizedParameters; | |||
| // Dependencies of this plugin (we need the expansion plugin to access its model) | |||
| dependantPlugins: [UseTreeViewExpansionSignature]; | |||
| dependencies: [UseTreeViewExpansionSignature]; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah yes, this is a relief 🙈
This was referenced Jul 13, 2024
This was referenced Jul 20, 2024
DungTiger
pushed a commit
to DungTiger/mui-x
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 23, 2024
… and in the item (mui#13523)
thomasmoon
pushed a commit
to thomasmoon/mui-x
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 9, 2024
… and in the item (mui#13523)
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.
Internal improvements for #13388
If a function needs to execute some logic from a plugin, it can usually be done in two ways:
apiRefin both the Tree View and the Data Grid)Solution 1. is usually simpler to implement and to read, but it does not respect the separation of concern, if our function is inside a plugin A and wants to call a method of the plugin B, then we have a dependency, A require B in order to work.
For pro features, we tend to favor solution 2 to avoid leaking pro code inside the community package (which is why the item enhancers have been introduced for the Drag and Drop feature on the Tree View).
But on the Tree View, we also have to support 2 versions of the components in the same plan (
SimpleTreeViewandRichTreeView). @noraleonte is currently working on an editing feature that will only be available in theRichTreeView, this feature has a lot of dependencies (the keyboard navigation needs to be aware of it for example). We could rely on Solution 2 but it would make the codebase a lot harder to read. Instead, I am proposing to boost Solution 1. by introducing a notion of optional dependencies. The Plugin A is aware of the plugin B, it calls the method of the plugin B, but it is not sure if the plugin B is present or not.