The templates contained in a slot have to be rendered with the current
scope, but during the rendering of the sub component, which happens
later (after the willStart for the sub component). Therefore, we need to
save the scope that should be used for the slots, so we can access the
proper variables. This was done using an Object.assign() statement,
which is actually only a shallowclone for the own properties.
In this commit, we properly copy all the properties for the current
scope, even those contained in the prototype.
closes#855
Have a t-call within a t-set-slot of a component.
The called template has a t-component directive.
It should be like:
```xml
<t t-name="Zero">
<Slotted>
<t t-call="someTemplate" />
</Slotted>
</t>
<t t-name="someTemplate">
<SomeComponent />
</t>
```
Before this commit, the parent of SomeComponent was the Zero component
After this commit, the parent of SomeComponent is the Slotted Component as it should be
closes#862
The reviewer for the commit on named slots inside named slots did not
notice that there was an infinite loop. Because of his sloppiness, Owl
could block in an infinite loop when a named t-slots was defined inside
a subcomponent, but not as a direct child.
Previous code naively handled nested t-set-slots: if a second named
slots was found, it overrode the first.
In this commit, we use a set to make sure that we only use the first
found t-set-slot node. Also, we ignore set-slots defined in a sub
components, because these slots are only relevant to the sub component
itself.
Note that it works as expected because document.querySelectorAll
performs a search depth first, so we will always use the named slots
closer to the parent element, in term of depth.
closes#682
This is a rarely (if ever) used feature, but according to our qweb
reference implementation, it is possible to use the
t-call directive on an arbitrary html tag, like this:
<div t-call="my.template"/>
It is then interpreted as:
<div><t t-call="my.template"/></div>
So, with this commit, we make sure that the owl qweb implementation
matches that behaviour.
closes#706
This new t-set-slot directive is meant to replace t-set when we need to
define the content of a sub slot. All new code should use that
directive.
The old t-set directive is still supported for now, but this should be
removed when we publish Owl 2.0.
Unfortunately, we chose to use the directive `t-set` to define sub slot
contents in a template.
The goal was to reuse a directive for a similar use case: defining sub
template is almost the same as defining a slot content.
Obviously, this introduces a name conflict: the inner content of a
component cannot use t-set t-value anymore (nor t-set with a body
value), since they are interpreted as slot names.
We mitigate the issue here by only interpreting as slot content the
`t-set` statement located immediately below the parent component tag
name and with a body content.
However, a real fix need to introduce an additional directive to resolve
the ambiguity.
In most cases, we just want Component<any, Env>. But since it was so
annoying to have always the type Env, we actually used
Component<any,any> everywhere.
With this commit, the generic types have a default (and their order is
swapped), so we can simply use Component in most cases, and
Component<Props> when we want to type the props.
Géry Debongnie