Document Fragments #100
Merged
Document Fragments #100
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
bcomnes
approved these changes
Mar 21, 2018
|
@goto-bus-stop I knew there was a third pull request somewhere 😅If this looks good to you, maybe merge this in too. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
If we allow DocumentFragments to be generated with nanohtml (choojs/nanohtml#118), then we should make sure that they can't be used to morph the existing tree.
Morphing with a DocumentFragment doesn't make sense, because it doesn't have an actual root node.
Potentially we could also define that if a DocumentFragment is used it will only morph the children of the rootTree. That would also solve #96. But I think that should be discussed further somewhere.
For now this is my proposal: I added an assert statement, so it will reject DocumentFragments.