Releases: intercellular/cell
v1.2.0: Genotype preservation (#145)
- HTMLElement.prototype.$snapshot()
- Proper HTMLElement.prototype event handler handling
- Safari Bug handling - Object.hasOwnProperty(HTMLElement.prototype, “style”) is false
v1.1.1
Code Readability
- Added Comments and renamed a couple of internal variables for consistency ae733e6
Performance
- Performance fix: Inserting for the first time doesn't require an index because we'll be doing
appendChild
. Getting rid of this significantly improved the performance as mentioned here. Commit: 24b77e8
Feature
Plan
Manual Instantiation of Cells
This release introduces an ability to manually instantiate cells instead of relying on the default automated generation.
Overview
- Internal: Separate
God.plan
out fromGod.create
, so that all the prototype overrides can be handled instantly without waiting for theonload
event, as well as allowing for injection into dynamically loaded modules. - External: allow a public API for all HTML elements:
$node.$cell({$cell: true, ... }
: Transforms the regular$node
into a Cell nodelet c = $node.$cell({...})
(without$cell: true
): Generates a Cell node in memory and returns it
Problems to Solve
Currently, Cell automatically figures out what elements to turn into Cells by searching from global variables with a $cell
key. This works in most cases, but there are many other cases where it makes sense to manually create cells.
Some of the problems brought up were:
1. Namespace
From #12 (comment)
"The one thing I would still like to find a solution for is the fact that declarative cells must not be lexically scoped -- only var or a global declaration will do, and neither const nor let will work."
Like @Caffeinix pointed out in above comment, Cell won't be able to automatically detect const
and let
variables since they are not global variables.
2. Integration into legacy frameworks
The power of Cell comes from its pluggable nature. You can use it with any existing framework and any web library with zero hassle because it creates an actual, completely encapsulated HTML node instead of a virtual DOM.
@kingoftheknoll mentioned integrating with angular #12 (comment) and I think this argument generally applies to all other frameworks/libraries out there.
It would be great to be able to create cells that can be injected into other frameworks. Cell is well positioned for that since it doesn't create any extra data structure like virtual DOM but instead creates native HTML elements that contain everything they will ever need to work when plugged into any context.
3. Doesn't work in dynamically loaded contexts
This is related to #2 above, but nowadays many web apps use dynamic module loading, and web browsers themselves will natively support them in the future via ES6.
To be clear, I think most of these modular approaches on the frontend web context are convoluted and mostly unnecessary (which was the main reason I wrote Cell), but I also see no reason not to support these approaches since allowing manual instantiation has very clear and powerful benefits.
Currently it's not easy to integrate Cell into existing web apps that dynamically load modules. Maybe you're using angular, maybe you're using Backbone.js, or anything else really. This is because the main Cell creation logic creates cells this way:
- Wait for
window.onload
event - Find all global variables that have a
$cell
attribute - Automatically build cells from these variables
This means, by default there's only one opportunity to create cells--at the very beginning.
Liberating Cell from this specific lifecycle will allow dynamic creation of cells, making Cell truly injectable into all kinds of context.
One possible approach (and why it's not optimal)
A lot of people suggested an option to add something like this:
const $node = Cell({
$type: "p",
$text: "I will be created by a global Cell variable"
})
Well the thing is, it would be best if we could avoid the global variable Cell
altogether. To understand the rationale behind this, please read #111
Basically, we already have a decentralized DOM, why not utilize it instead of creating a centralized constructor? This would be in line with the philosophy of the library after all.
Goals
The main goals:
- The Creator function does not pollute the global namespace but belongs to each HTML element, including the body.
- Any regular HTML node should have the ability to: Evolve into a cell.
- Any regular HTML node should have the ability to: Create a new cell without directly adding it to the DOM.
Solution
Here's the solution:
- Add a
$cell()
function towindow.Element.prototype
. - The
$cell()
function can be used in two different ways, depending on the existence of the$cell
key on the JSON argument.
With this addition, we should be able to achieve the 3 goals mentioned above.
1. Evolving into a cell
Let's say we already have an HTML page, and we want to morph parts of it into Cells.
This is already somehow possible in a 100% declarative manner by using the "id" attribute But that approach assumes you're using Cell as standalone, because it depends on the window.onload
event.
Anyway, sometimes you may want to use Cell along inside an existing web app that dynamically loads modules, which means using window.onload
event won't work. We want to be able to instantiate these Cells inside each module after they're loaded.
The new Element.prototype.$cell()
function allows you to take ANY regular HTML element, pass the blueprint object (gene) as a parameter, and morph into a cell. Here's an example: https://jsfiddle.net/euzrzk8n/1/
<html>
<script src="https://rawgit.com/intercellular/cell/plan/cell.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/d3/4.9.1/d3.min.js"></script>
<div id="viz"></div>
<script>
document.querySelector("#viz").$cell({
_sampleSVG: null,
$cell: true,
_r: 40,
_cx: 50,
_cy: 50,
_width: 100,
_height: 100,
_color: 'red',
$init: function(){
var self = this;
this._sampleSVG = d3.select(this)
.append("svg")
.attr("width", this._width)
.attr("height", this._height);
this._sampleSVG.append("circle")
.style("stroke", "gray")
.style("fill", "white")
.attr("r", this._r)
.attr("cx", this._cx)
.attr("cy", this._cy)
.on("mouseover", function(){d3.select(this).style("fill", self._color);})
.on("mouseout", function(){d3.select(this).style("fill", "white");});
}
})
</script>
</html>
Here's another example: https://jsfiddle.net/3v1ttcga/2/
I took an example template from bootstrap website and just converted static components into Cells.
2. Create a new cell without directly adding it to the DOM.
Above method should cover a lot of the use cases where you want to manually create cells.
But since we're at this, let's go deeper.
The previous approach assumes that we already have an HTML node we want to transform. What if we just want to create a cell from scratch, without adding it to the DOM directly?
In this case, you can just get rid of the $cell
attribute from the argument when calling the $cell()
function, and it will only create the cells in memory.
Here's an example of creating a <p>
element from <body>
without automatically appending : https://jsfiddle.net/vj5bwjxb/
let gene = {
$type: "p",
$text: "I will be created by 'body' but you'll have to manually add me to the DOM"
};
for(let index=0; index<10; index++){
let cell = document.body.$cell(gene);
document.body.appendChild(cell);
}
Notice:
- There is no
$cell
attribute on thegene
object. - You manually add them to the DOM with
document.body.appendChild(cell)
Conclusion
By adding the additional $cell()
method on window.Element.prototype
we were able to avoid creating a global variable that creates cells.
This is also in line with the core philosophy since it is not some centralized entity that creates cells, but any node can create a cell, which means no compromise was made.
Original discussion here: #125
Birth
v1.0.0 All $ variables should be tracked by default even without an explicit…