refactor: remove lwc-dynamic directive #3562
Conversation
| @@ -43,7 +43,6 @@ const { code } = transformSync(source, filename, options); | |||
| - `namespace` (type: `string`, required) - namespace of the component, e.g. `x` in `x/foo`. | |||
| - `stylesheetConfig` (type: `object`, default: `{}`) - The stylesheet compiler configuration to pass to the `@lwc/style-compiler`. | |||
| - `experimentalDynamicComponent` (type: `DynamicImportConfig`, default: `null`) - The configuration to pass to `@lwc/compiler`. | |||
| - `experimentalDynamicDirective` (type: `boolean`, default: `false`) - The configuration to pass to `@lwc/template-compiler` to enable deprecated dynamic components. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To avoid breaking downstreams, can we just force it to be false regardless of what's passed in? This is what we did for minify and are going to do for lwc:spread #3544.
Then we can add it to the breaking changes wishlist to actually remove the config.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@nolanlawson now that I think about it, the experimentalDynamicDirective option was released at the start of 246 and I think the only consumers are lwc-platform.
I think the experimentalDynamicComponent option may be the one that affects more downstream dependencies.
I'll double-check to see if anyone else is using experimentalDynamicDirective but otherwise I think it should be safe to remove that option.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I checked all of our internal repos and it looks like the only usage of this is in lwc-platform, I think it should be safe to remove the experimentalDynamicDirective option.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jmsjtu Should this be green in Nucleus before merging?
|
/nucleus test |
Details
In preparation for the new dynamic components syntax to go GA, this PR removes all references to the
lwc:dynamicdirective (#3331).This PR cannot be merged until the usages of
lwc:dynamichave been removed incorewhich is currently in progress (W-13519768).Does this pull request introduce a breaking change?
This change will break any users of
lwc:dynamic.Does this pull request introduce an observable change?
The
lwc:dynamicwill no longer be a valid template directive.GUS work item
W-12607866