| stage | start-date | release-date | release-versions | teams | prs | project-link | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
recommended |
2020-04-30 00:00:00 UTC |
2020-11-16 00:00:00 UTC |
|
|
|
This RFC proposes a new API, invokeHelper, which can be used to invoke a
helper definition, creating an instance of the helper in JavaScript.
// app/components/data-loader.js
import Component from '@glimmer/component';
import Helper from '@ember/component/helper';
import { invokeHelper } from '@ember/helper';
class PlusOneHelper extends Helper {
compute([number]) {
return number + 1;
}
}
export default class PlusOneComponent extends Component {
plusOne = invokeHelper(this, PlusOneHelper, () => {
return {
positional: [this.args.number],
};
});
}As Ember has evolved, the framework has been developing a model of reactive, incremental computation. This model is oriented around templates, which map data and JavaScript business logic into HTML that is displayed to the user.
On the first render, this mapping is fairly similar to standard programming languages. You can imagine that every component is like a function call, receiving arguments and data, processing it, and placing it within its own template, ultimately producing HTML as the "return value" of the component. Components can use other components, much like functions can call other functions, resulting in a tree structure of nested components, which is the application. At the root of our application is a single "main" component (similar to the main function in many programming languages) which takes arguments and returns the full HTML of the initial render.
Where Ember's programming model really begins to differ is in subsequent renders. Rather than re-running the entire program whenever something changes, producing new HTML as a result, Ember incrementally re-runs the portions of the program which have changed. It knows about these portions via its change tracking mechanism, autotracking.
This means fundamentally that the tree of components differs from a tree of functions because components can live longer. They exist until the portion of the program that they belong to has been removed by an incremental update, and as such, they have a lifecycle. Unlike a function, a component can update over time, and will be destroyed at some unknown point in the future.
Components previously exposed this lifecycle directly via a number of
lifeycle hooks, making components the smallest atom for reactive composition.
This presented an issue for composability in general. In the world of functions,
a piece of code can always be broken out into a new function, giving the user
the ability to extract repeated functionality, abstracting common patterns and
concepts and reducing brittleness. For instance, in the following example we
extract several portions of the myProgram function to make it clearer what
each section is doing, and isolate its behavior.
// before
function myProgram(data = []) {
for (let item of data) {
// ...
}
let values = data.map(() => {
// ...
});
while (values.length) {
let value = values.pop();
// ...
}
}// after
function initialProcessing(data) {
for (let item of data) {
// ...
}
}
function extractValues(data) {
return data.map(() => {
// ...
});
}
function processValues(values) {
while (values.length) {
let value = values.pop();
// ...
}
}
function myProgram(data = []) {
initialProcessing(data);
let values = extractValues(data);
processValues(values);
}Since components are the smallest reactive atom, there often is not a way to do this transparently, since the only portions of the code that are reactive are the component hooks themselves. This results in related code being spread across multiple locations, with the user being forced to keep the relationships between these bits of code in their head at all times, and understand the interactions between them.
Consider this search component, which updates performs a cancellable fetch request and updates the document title whenever the search query is updated:
import Component from '@ember/component';
import { fetch, cancelFetch } from 'fetch-with-cancel';
export default class Search extends Component {
// Args
query = '';
@tracked data;
didReceiveAttrs() {
// Update the document title
document.title = `Search Result for "${this.query}"`;
// Cancel the previous fetch if it's still running
cancelFetch(this.promise);
// create a new fetch request, and set the data property to the response
this.promise = fetch(`www.example.com/search?query=${this.query}`)
.then((response) => response.json());
.then((data) => this.data = data);
}
willDestroy() {
cancelFetch(this.promise);
}
}This component mixes two separate concerns in its lifecycle hooks - fetching the data, and updating the document title. We can extract these into utility functions in some isolated cases, but it becomes difficult when functionality covers multiple parts of the lifecycle, like with the fetch logic here:
import Component from '@ember/component';
import { fetch, cancelFetch } from 'fetch-with-cancel';
function updateDocumentTitle(title) {
document.title = title;
}
function updateFetch(url, callback, previousPromise) {
// Cancel the previous fetch if it's still running
cancelFetch(previousPromise);
// create a new fetch request, and set the data property to the response
return fetch(url)
.then((response) => response.json());
.then((data) => callback(data));
}
function teardownFetch(promise) {
cancelFetch(promise);
}
export default class Search extends Component {
// Args
query = '';
@tracked data;
didReceiveAttrs() {
updateDocumentTitle(`Search Result for "${this.query}"`)
this.promise = updateFetch(
`www.example.com/search?query=${this.query}`,
(data) => this.data = data,
this.promise
);
}
willDestroy() {
teardownFetch(this.promise);
}
}We can see here that we needed to add two separate helper functions to extract the data fetching functionality, one to handle updating the fetch, and one to handle tearing it down, because those different pieces of code need to run at different portions of the component lifecycle. If we want to reuse these functions elsewhere, this adds a lot of boilerplate to integrate the functions in each lifecycle hook.
There are a few alternatives that would allow us to extract this functionality together.
-
We could use mixins, since they allow us to specify multiple functions and mix them into a class. Mixins however introduce a lot of complexity in the inheritance hierarchy and are considered an antipattern, so this is not a good choice overall.
-
We could extract the functionality out to separate components. Components have a contained lifecycle, so they can manage any piece of functionality completely in isolation. This works nicely for the document title, but adds a lot of complexity for the data fetching, since we need to yield the data back out via the template:
// app/components/doc-title.js import Component from '@ember/component'; export default class DocTitle extends Component { didReceiveAttrs() { document.title = this.title; } }
// app/components/fetch-data.js import Component from '@ember/component'; import { fetch, cancelFetch } from 'fetch-with-cancel'; export default class FetchData extends Component { @tracked data; didReceiveAttrs() { // Cancel the previous fetch if it's still running cancelFetch(this.promise); // create a new fetch request, and set the data property to the response this.promise = fetch(this.url) .then((response) => response.json()); .then((data) => this.data = data); } willDestroy() { cancelFetch(this.promise); } }
This structure is also not ideal because the components aren't being used for templating, they're just being used for logic effectively.
-
We could use other template constructs, such as helpers or modifiers. Both helpers and modifiers have lifecycles, like components, and can be used to contain functionality. Modifiers aren't really a good choice here though, because it would require us to add an element that we don't need. So, helpers are the better option.
Helpers work, but like components they require us to move some of our logic into the template, even if that isn't really necessary:
// app/helpers/doc-title.js import { helper } from '@ember/component/helper'; export default helper(([title]) => { document.title = title; });
// app/helpers/fetch-data.js import Helper from '@ember/component/helper'; import { fetch, cancelFetch } from 'fetch-with-cancel'; export default class FetchData extends Helper { @tracked data; compute([url]) { if (this._url !== url) { this.url = url; // Cancel the previous fetch if it's still running cancelFetch(this.promise); // create a new fetch request, and set the data property to the response this.promise = fetch(url) .then((response) => response.json()); .then((data) => this.data = data); } return this.data; } willDestroy() { cancelFetch(this.promise); } }
Out of these options, helpers are the closest to what we want - they produce computed values directly without a template, and with the recent addition of effect helpers they can be used side-effect to accomplish tasks like setting the document title. The only downside is that they can only be invoked in templates, so they require you to design your components around using them in templates only. This can be difficult to do in many cases, where the data wants to be accessed to create derived state for instance.
This RFC proposes adding a way to create helpers within JavaScript directly, extending the reactive model in a way that allows users to extract common reactive code and patterns, and reuse them transparently. This will make helpers the new reactive atom of the system - the reactive equivalent of a "function" in our incremental model. Like components, they have a lifecycle, and can update over time. Unlike components, they can exist nested in JavaScript classes and in templates, and they can produce any type of value, making them much more flexible.
// app/components/search.js
import Component from '@ember/component';
export default class Search extends Component {
data = invokeHelper(this, FetchData, () => {
return {
positional: [`www.example.com/search?query=${this.query}`],
};
});
constructor() {
super(...arguments);
invokeHelper(this, DocTitle, () => {
return {
positional: [`Search Result for "${this.query}"`],
};
});
}
}Note how the concerns are completely separated in this version of the component. The polling logic is self contained, and separated from the data fetching logic. Both sets of logic are able to contain their lifecycles, updating based on changes to tracked state, and tearing down when the program destroys them. In the future, convenience APIs can be added to make invoking them easier to read:
export default class Search extends Component {
@use data = fetchData(() => `www.example.com/search?query=${this.query}`);
constructor() {
super(...arguments);
use(this, docTitle(() => `Search Result for "${this.query}"`));
}
}This RFC proposes adding the invokeHelper function, imported from
@ember/helper. The function will have the following interface (using
TypeScript types for brevity and clarity):
interface TemplateArgs {
positional?: unknown[],
named?: Record<string, unknown>
}
type HelperDefinition<T = unknown> = object;
function invokeHelper<T = unknown>(
parentDestroyable: object,
definition: HelperDefinition<T>,
computeArgs?: (context: object) => TemplateArgs
): Cache<T>;Let's step through the arguments to the function one by one:
This is the parent for the helper definition. The helper will be associated as a destroyable to this parent context, using the destroyables API, so that its lifecycle is tied to the parent. The only requirement of the parent is that it is an object of some kind that can be destroyed. If the parent has an owner, this owner will also be passed to the helper manager that it is invoked on.
This allows helper's lifecycles to be entangled correctly with the parent, and encourages users to ensure they've properly handled the lifecycle of their helper.
This is the helper definition. It can be any object, with the only requirement
being that a helper manager has been associated with it via the
setHelperManager API.
This is an optional function that produces the arguments to the helper. The
function receives the parent context as an argument, and must return an object
with a positional property that is an array and/or a named property that is
an object.
This getter function will be autotracked when it is run, so the process of retrieving the arguments is autotracked. If any of the values used to create the arguments object change, the helper will be updated, just like in templates.
The function returns a Cache instance, as defined in the Autotracking Memoization RFC.
This cache returns the most recent value of the helper, and will update whenever
the helper updates. Users can access the value using the getValue function for
caches.
If the helper has a scheduled effect, using getValue on the cache will not run
it eagerly. It will run as scheduled, until the helper is destroyed.
The cache will be also be destroyable, so that using destroy() from the
destroyables API on it will trigger its destruction early. Users can do this to
clean up a helper before the parent context is destroyed.
Standard helpers that return a value will only be updated when they are used,
either in JavaScript or in the template. The args getter and the relevant helper
manager lifecycle hooks will be called when the value property on the helper
is used.
Side-effecting helpers, by contrast, run their updates specifically when scheduled. When introduced by the Helper Manager RFC, there was no relative ordering specified in the scheduling of side-effecting helpers, because there was no way for them to have children, and we don't generally specify ordering of siblings. With this RFC, it will be possible to invoke a side-effecting helper within another side-effecting helper, so they will be able to have children for the first time.
This RFC proposes modifying the Helper Manager RFC to specify that the
runEffect hook of a helper always runs after the runEffect hooks of its
children. This mirrors the timing semantics of modifier hooks in templates.
This is a low-level API for invoking helpers and creating instances. The API is meant to be functional, but not particularly readable or ergonomic. This API can be wrapped with higher level, more ergonomic APIs in the ecosystem, until we're sure what the final API should be.
This API is meant to be a low-level primitive which will eventually be replaced with higher level wrappers, possibly decorators, that will be much easier to use and recommend to average app developers. As such, it will only be taught through API documentation.
Once community addons are built with higher level APIs that are more ergonomic, we should also add a section in the guides that uses them to demonstrate techniques for using helpers in JS. This strategy is similar to how modifiers are documented today.
The invokeHelper function can be used to create a helper instance in
JavaScript.
// app/components/data-loader.js
import Component from '@glimmer/component';
import Helper from '@ember/component/helper';
import { invokeHelper } from '@ember/helper';
class PlusOneHelper extends Helper {
compute([num]) {
return number + 1;
}
}
export default class PlusOneComponent extends Component {
plusOne = invokeHelper(this, PlusOneHelper, () => {
return {
positional: [this.args.number],
};
});
}It receives three arguments:
context: The parent context of the helper. When the parent is torn down and removed, the helper will be as well.definition: The definition of the helper.computeArgs: An optional function that produces the arguments to the helper. The function receives the parent context as an argument, and must return an object with apositionalproperty that is an array and/or anamedproperty that is an object.
And it returns a Cache instance that contains the most recent value of the
helper. You can access the helper using getValue() like any other cache. The
cache is also destroyable, and using the destroy() function on it will cause
the helper to be torn down.
Note that using getValue() on helpers that have scheduled effects will not
trigger the effect early. Effects will continue to run at their scheduled time.
-
Additional API surface complexity. There will be additional ways to use helpers that we will have to teach users about in general. This is true, but given it helps to solve a lot of common problems that users have in Octane it should be worthwhile.
-
This API is a primitive that is not particularly ergonomic or user friendly, but this is part of the point. It gets the job done, and can be built on top of to create a better high level API.
- The
@useand Resources RFC proposes a higher level approach to this problem space, but had a number of concerns and drawbacks. After much discussion, we decided that it would be better to ship the primitives to build something like it in user-space, and prove out the ideas in it.