-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 563
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[WIP] Move route data to Astro.locals
#2390
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
✅ Deploy Preview for astro-starlight ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
size-limit report 📦
|
Really exciting to see this!
With the i18n update didn't we have a somewhat breaking change (possibly that's the
Is there any norm here in Astro-land for 3rd party integrations? This has a potential for name collisions if a user has implemented middleware, correct? If that's the case then I think it would be good to at the very least prefix any locals with |
Sharing a few quick thoughts before I forget them as I've been playing with the idea locally too and we can discuss more in depth later.
As this impacts components and not user components, I've been experimenting with a getter function instead that throws if the route data is not available, which would mean it was called in a non-Starlight route.
Definitely a tricky one indeed, been trying a few things but haven't found something that I'm happy with yet too.
As we have seen from the If we compare to labels, in a panel of 15 plugins, only 3 where using |
Spent a bit of time revisiting this PR and feeling quite positive about the idea. Made the following adjustments, which helps it feel better:
There’s a type error I’m not 100% sure about — I guess we’re pulling some of our virtual modules into view for type checking that we weren’t previously? Not sure, but haven’t investigate too much. Next up I’d like to tackle the idea of a route data “middleware”/“pipeline” so that users and plugins have a place to plug in and modify stuff. |
Lunaria Status Overview🌕 This pull request will trigger status changes. Learn moreBy default, every PR changing files present in the Lunaria configuration's You can change this by adding one of the keywords present in the Tracked Files
Warnings reference
|
Context from today’s work: fixed type checks by moving around some code. Basically the issue was that this PR exposes the |
I'm also very excited about this PR! Just to keep track of what has been achieved already and what needs to be done after reading the latest changes:
Please correct me if any bullet point is wrong or misleading in any way, I'll correct and keep the list up to date if you want. *We: I don't see myself included, props to @delucis,@lorenzolewis and @HiDeoo |
Chose `klona` after some comparisons with other libraries. It is pleasantly light-weight and fast. It also has a nice feature of being able to progressively opt in to levels of complexity depending on the objects that need cloning.
Description
Early draft PR exploring moving Starlight’s route data object to
Astro.locals
— currently this is passed down viaAstro.props
to all our templating components.There are some tricky nuances here for sure.
For example, middleware runs for all routes on a site, which can include non Starlight pages. For these we can’t generate route data. For now I’ve reflected this in the types for locals and asserted
Astro.locals.routeData!
in the components. There’s not really a sensible way to guard that without duplicating a null check in every component, but also it feels like route data should be defined in all cases where Starlight’s<Page>
is rendered.The
<StarlightPage>
component poses some challenges. Right now you pass some props and it generates route data. I’ve hacked this in by assigning that generated data to locals inside the component for now, but this does mean you can’t transform data for pages created this way with additional middleware. Not sure there’s any way to solve this?One way might be to have a dedicated system of “route data middleware” implemented at the Starlight level instead of using generic Astro middleware, e.g.
We could bundle those in a virtual module and have both Starlight’s
locals.ts
and<StarlightPage>
use them or something:The current branch rips out the prop drilling entirely. That means any overrides that rely on
Astro.props
will break. Could it be worth doing something to ease migration? Deprecate props but keep them around? Throw an error something like we did forlabels
? Something to think about.There’s probably a tidier way to do some of the code — just did the quick and easy thing for now. (For example,
Content
is currently typed as optional in the route data object to make it easy to throw it in where I needed it, without checking all the places that type is used. But could probably tidy that up to have a dedicated separate type.)Can also discuss naming here. So far it’s
Astro.locals.routeData
, but there’s probably an argument for something a bit more descriptive likeAstro.locals.starlightRoute
or even justAstro.locals.starlight
potentially.