fix: Stub instance of the same component

[freakzlike]

Fixes #1162

I'm not really happy with the wording, because there is a lot of double negation. However, the code does the job

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for vue-test-utils-docs ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	bb080b9
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/vue-test-utils-docs/deploys/63f3babea95f6e0008001370
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1979--vue-test-utils-docs.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

[xanf]

Thank you @freakzlike, I'll go ahead and test this across real codebase right today :)

[cexbrayat]

Thanks for taking a stab at this @freakzlike
Code looks good, even if I agree it's hard to understand all the negations of negations

[cexbrayat]

maybe we could have two distinct functions, with different names to make it easier to understand?
like addToDoNotStubComponentsButOnlyInRoot? (I admit it's not a great name ^^)

[xanf]

I'm iterating on this one, and while I'm working on suggestion, would like to share my thoughts:

• we are already tracking "root" instances for auto-destroy purposes, so what I'm thinking might be is drop addToDoNotStubComponents logic for root but instead when making stub logic check it from registry of "root" instances (and move trackInstance logic and reigstry to separate f ile

[freakzlike]

I'm iterating on this one, and while I'm working on suggestion, would like to share my thoughts:

• we are already tracking "root" instances for auto-destroy purposes, so what I'm thinking might be is drop addToDoNotStubComponents logic for root but instead when making stub logic check it from registry of "root" instances (and move trackInstance logic and reigstry to separate f ile

You are right. It's only used for the root components and it might be a better way

[freakzlike]

I tried to retrieve or check for the root component without the need of rootComponents, but didn't manage to do so for all cases. The logic has not changed now, but it's a bit easier to read I think

[lmiller1990]

Need a rebase, since we just released the renderToString PR.

Glad @xanf is running this on a real code base - will wait back to hear from him before merging this one up.

[cexbrayat]

LGTM

This needs to be rebased, as some logic moved to src/createInstance now that renderToString landed (sorry)

[lmiller1990]

Shall we merge or did we want more testing from @xanf? Happy to move forward as-is.

[xanf]

@freakzlike @lmiller1990 I'm going to finish testing no later than tomorrow, sorry for delay - our codebase uses v-once, and I need to use vuejs with this PR vuejs/core#7730 merged to test it, cause compiler blows up

[lmiller1990]

I think we should merge and release this one. I'll give it another 24h then ship.