Block Bindings: Create utils for block bindings #62063
Closed
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
SantosGuillamot
added
[Type] Code Quality
SantosGuillamot
requested review from
ellatrix,
fluiddot,
dcalhoun and
tellthemachines
as code owners
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
|
Size Change: +623 B (+0.04%) Total Size: 1.74 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
ellatrix
reviewed
May 30, 2024
|
|
||
| const { setAttributes } = props; | ||
| const boundAttributes = useSelect( () => { | ||
| return getBoundAttributesValues( clientId, context, registry ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this a reusable function if it's only used once? I also don't really like this, it becomes unclear what store this is selecting from.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was meant to be used in other places like allow editing of post meta, but we changed the approach there so it is not reused anymore. See related comment.
ellatrix
reviewed
May 30, 2024
| export function getBoundAttributesValues( clientId, blockContext, registry ) { | ||
| const attributes = registry | ||
| .select( blockEditorStore ) | ||
| .getBlockAttributes( clientId ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You sneaked in a block editor store subscription here for every block, which will impact performance. Why not use the attributes prop?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried to avoid passing attributes as a parameter, but I think it makes sense then.
|
The PR title/description makes its sound like this is just moving code, but it's not? |
It was the intention, but I wasn't fully aware of the implications 😄 Anyway, this pull request was meant to create a reusable function to transform the attributes not only in the Edit hook but in other places if wanted. I thought it was needed for the pull request to allow editing of post meta in bindings, but it isn't with the new approach there. I am marking it as draft again because I believe it could still be valuable something like that but there are some uncertainties we would need to explore deeper. Happy to close and reopen if you prefer. |
29 tasks
|
Is it still actionable? It looks like an alternative approach are being explored, example: |
|
I will close this and reopen it if consider necessary. |
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.
What?
I'm creating a new
bindingsutil file to store all the reusable functions instead of having it in the editor hook. As part of that, I'm abstracting the logic to change the block attributes with the bindings values into a function.Why?
It looks cleaner this way and we can reuse the same logic to replace the block attributes in the future.
How?
Just creating a new file and creating a new
transformBlockAttributesWithBindingsValuesfunction to replace the block attributes with bindings.Testing Instructions
Tests should pass. We are not adding new functionalities.