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

Revert specificity changes in PR #46 #105

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 17, 2016
Merged

Conversation

mixonic
Copy link
Collaborator

@mixonic mixonic commented Aug 5, 2016

#46 changed the specificity system used in route-recognizer to be much simpler, however the simpler implementation also lost some behaviors expected be real-world Ember apps. This introduces a test for such a case as reported in emberjs/ember.js#13960 and rolls back the changes from #46.

@mixonic
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mixonic commented Aug 5, 2016

#103 also fixes this newly added test

@nathanhammond
Copy link
Contributor

Closing in favor #103.

@nathanhammond
Copy link
Contributor

nathanhammond commented Aug 16, 2016

#103 is broken. Reverting it. This should apply cleanly after the revert of #103 lands.

@mixonic Can you:

(Or alternatively grant me access to your fork.)

This patch causes regressions in real Ember code. Two reasons this might
be the case:

* This code causes specificity on a previous route to stomp on a later
  route. It expects the return value from `currentState.put` is always
  fresh, and thus that specificity can be set. In reality the return
  state object may be reused, so setting a new specificity would stomp
  an existing one.
* This code does not take into account the depth of a segment added from
  a different route.
@mixonic
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mixonic commented Aug 17, 2016

@nathanhammond did the first, the second was unnecessary as the tests were already here 👏 Thank you for the regression test!!

@mixonic mixonic merged commit 2ddd675 into tildeio:master Aug 17, 2016
@mixonic mixonic deleted the specificity-fix branch August 17, 2016 00:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants