Skip to content
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

Amend RFC 0724 to include template type checking #808

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 15, 2022
Merged

Conversation

chriskrycho
Copy link
Contributor

RFC #724 originally intentionally excluded template type checking via Glint from its designation of "official support" for Ember. However, in the time since the RFC was authored, there have been two significant changes:

  1. Glint itself has matured significantly, with no known major issues at this time (though plenty of polish still to be done).

  2. The major design issues in Ember needed to unblock Glint have been resolved:

Although there remain a number of smaller design questions to resolve, this is sufficient for us to treat type-checked templates as a viable part of our story, and given viability, we think this is necessary.

RFC #724 originally intentionally excluded template type checking via
Glint from its designation of "official support" for Ember. However, in
the time since the RFC was authored, there have been two significant changes:

1.  Glint itself has matured significantly, with no known major issues
    at this time (though plenty of polish still to be done).

2.  The *major* design issues in Ember needed to unblock Glint have
    been resolved:

    - resolution of template identifiers (components, helpers, and
      modifiers): RFC #779
    - a Glimmer Component type signature which exposes information
      about the blocks and the target for `...attributes`: RFC #748

Although there remain a number of smaller design questions to resolve,
this is sufficient for us to treat type-checked templates as a viable
part of our story, and given *viability*, we think this is *necessary*.
@chriskrycho
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is now in Final Comment Period!

The previous addition of the paragraph still had it in Non-Goals, which
is literally the opposite of the point of this amendment RFC. Whoops!
@chriskrycho
Copy link
Contributor Author

We talked about this again at today's Framework Team meeting and are merging it! 🎉

@chriskrycho chriskrycho merged commit dd54b3c into master Apr 15, 2022
@delete-merged-branch delete-merged-branch bot deleted the amend-724 branch April 15, 2022 18:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant