Everything about Slinky -- issues, ideas for features, where it's being used, and more
I've debated doing some Webpack magic, but I doubt it would work well
Currently I'm exporting Slinky components directly, and that actually works too, but unfortunately the routing in Next.js is based on folder structure, which is probably not feasible to achieve with pure Scala.js.
I think I'll proceed with the glue code approach, and see if I can port one of the official Next.js samples to Slinky.
shadaj: I hit my first real hurdle, do you have any suggestions on how to do this in Slinky?
function App({ Component, pageProps }) {
return <Component {...pageProps} />
}It is for making a base component that is responsible for initializing all pages, see https://nextjs.org/docs/advanced-features/custom-app for more info.
ModuleSplitStyle.SmallestModules + Class components + fastLinkJS, the error message said that java.lang.object reference was undefined or something similar, fullLinkJS worked fine though. I fixed it by removing the last Class component I had, since it was just for testing class components anyway.It did work with
ModuleSplitStyle.FewestModules, but then compilation with Next.js took several seconds, so really not an option, but who needs class components anyway! ;)The link is here: https://github.com/Asamsig/next-slinky-example
Component as a ReactComponentClass[js.Object], then wrap it into a local ExternalComponent so that you can construct it with the given props
ModuleSplitStyle.SmallestModules, there are some hacks that Slinky uses that depend on a couple of Scala.js internals so it is possible that those are breaking
1 reply
I have a callback function for a Select Input that the javascript library sends me a simple object of what was selected: {label: String, value: String}
If I let Slinky's Reader deserialize this for me though I get (from js console):
e$2: $c_Lcom_me_data_FieldOption
Lcom_me_data_FieldOption__f_label: "New Feature"
Lcom_me_data_FieldOption__f_value: "feature"This works fine for scalajs, but the issue is that inside my callback I need to yet again call another js function, passing it this object. It doesn't like seeing the fully qualified names of course.
Is this kind of interop in slinky supported?
and another smaller question, how do you get external objects to appear as "ReactElement"? For instance, I am importing an icon:
@js.native
@JSImport("@atlaskit/icon/glyph/unlock", JSImport.Default)
object UnlockIcon extends js.ObjectAnd if I put it as the button text it complains it is not of type ReactElement
UnlockIcon extend ReactElement instead of js.Object
SmallestModules work with functional components?
2 replies
Reader/Writer derivation, since @react isn't required to use Slinky
sometimes i find js.Any to be suitable as a type (usually in avoiding overly complex union types) for when I have no really breakable logic interacting with a given variable, but at some point I need to convert a case class to that js.Any type.
How do I tell slinky to convert my case class to a js.Any explicity so that the attributes have the same names as the case class in the javascript?
Hi all, I have a feeling this question is extremely basic, but I can't find a working example. When I try to add readOnly := true to a textarea like so:
textarea(
rows := props.numberOfRows.toString,
cols := props.numberOfColumns.toString,
readOnly := true,
defaultValue := "Blah"
)I get the following compilation error:
found : slinky.core.AttrPair[slinky.web.html._readOnly_attr.type]
required: slinky.core.TagMod[slinky.web.html.textarea.tag.type]]could someone please educate me here on how this is achieved?
Ah, I got the above working like this:
private val readOnlyAttr = CustomAttribute[Boolean]("readOnly")
textarea(
rows := props.numberOfRows.toString,
cols := props.numberOfColumns.toString,
readOnlyAttr := true,
defaultValue := "Blah"
)Would someone mind pointing me in the direction of some learning materials on why the custom things are necessary? I'm very green in the world of html!
2 replies
Hi all, I hope this is the right place to ask about slinky-styled-components. Whilst getting started with this (using version 0.1.0+10-b09028e5) I've experimented with a simple styled div:
val divRef = useRef[Div](null)
val styledDiv = styled.div(css"""width: 100%; height: 640px;""")
styledDiv(ref := divRef)Then the thing that's attempting to render itself within that div is trying to call attachShadow on that div element, only to be told that attachShadow is not a function on that element. A quick search on the web didn't yield a great deal other than make sure the html element supports attachShadow, which div should. Does anyone have any experience with this kind of error or any thoughts on what the issue might be? Many thanks!
There is open issues for it, so we can hope they get resolved in the near future.
I took a tour over the Play-JSON & Magnolia progress and value classes, opaque types, nested sealed traits, default values, are the biggest issues currently with migrating to Scala 3.
I've been experimenting with making Slinky, Scala 3 compatible, but I ran out of time for the time being, most of the work I've done is updating dependencies and splitting code that isn't compatible anymore.
I've barely started to look into the macros, my unfamiliarity with Scala 2&3 macros, made it a bigger endeavor, so not any progress to report.
I have a branch on my on fork here: https://github.com/Asamsig/slinky/tree/scala-3-support
The basic derivations should be quite straightforward with Mirrors as you've done, the problem is what you say, that they currently don't support, recursive case classes, value classes, default values and such, so for now we won't be able to give parity with Scala 2 Slinky.
Perhaps we can finish up a MVP, with what is supported now, document unsupported things, and have a Beta release or something for Scala 3 😎
someProps = Some(reactElement) even though that props attribute wasn't an Option type it was uncaught. So I removed the Some and it made no difference.
Option conversion falls under that
all good, this only came up because I am trying to tuck as much logic as possible into the JVM, which boils down to ReactElement.asInstanceOf[SomeCaseClassThatExtendsAnyVal]
So that on the JVM side I at least have the ability of handling the ReactElement objects. But now that I know option counts as a ReactElement I need to rethink my strategy a bit
@shadaj:matrix.org figured out an answer to my question up above
Whenever js Objects don't seem to automatically be read correctly into the case class, for some reason just treating them as a class that extends js.Object appears to work.
Is this intended?
Example:
The notorious react-table has a hook, useTable that returns a ton of stuff, but for example here is a working facade:
@js.native
@JSImport("react-table", JSImport.Default)
object ReactTableLibrary extends js.Object {
def useTable(props: js.Object, plugins: js.Any*): TableProps = js.native
}If I use a case class I will get the [object object] is not an instance of TableProps error, forcing me to instead return a js.Object and then dynamically building the case class myself!
val props = useTable(...).asInstanceOf[js.Dynamic]
val typedProps = TableProps(
props.selectDynamic("headerGroups").asInstanceOf[js.Array[HeaderGroup]],
props.selectDynamic("rows").asInstanceOf[js.Array[Row]],
props.selectDynamic("prepareRow").asInstanceOf[js.Function1[Row, Unit]]
)If instead I define TableProps as a regular class that extends js.Object, no need for gross dynamic selecting, slinky works!
// solution:
class TableProps(
val headerGroups: js.Array[HeaderGroup],
val rows: js.Array[Row],
val prepareRow: js.Function1[Row, Unit]
) extends js.Objectclass. Just weird cause sometimes case class works fine and then in certain edge cases it doesn't. Is there a reason?
js.native facade there's no automatic conversion and you get an error; when defining the return type of a js.native method, you'll generally have to use a js.Object trait to define that type
useState returns a new SetStateHookCallbackinstance each time? I was using this as a dependency in useEffect. It’s not strictly necessary to pass it as a dependency since it should never change but I prefer to include everything rather than having special rules for certain things.
@shadaj:matrix.org thank you! And one excruciatingly difficult typo that can easily happen with a regular class, is for getting to put val in front of the attribute name.
If you don't do that, no compile-time error but it simply won't be included in the js Object!!
Catching that one kept me busy for a few hours :)