You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 7, 2024. It is now read-only.
The JS framework should be like vanilla JS, since:
webview doesn't like too complicated code and framework. For example, there are pain upstream bugs found in vscode-webview-ui-toolkit.
PS: we also have found some upstream bug of SVG rendering in webview, which hints that we may be better to have fully control of our code. Instead we will come into no idea on solving upstream bugs.
the JS framework should easily interoperate with vDOM of typst documents.
The refactoring plan and work needs participation of @Enter-tainer.
It is not quite urgent, and once we have a plan, we can break refactoring into parts and merge them into main branch. The each part of code refactoring should be simple, easy to review. And they should get separated into multiple version publish, so to avoid thrushing the stability of software?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
For the code piece shown in the desciption I think vanjs is OK. I wonder do we need the reactive functionality of it. I guess it might be useful in presentation mode where there are multiple buttons and key bindings
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
We need a JS framework to deduplicate code like this:
typst-preview/addons/frontend/src/typst-doc.ts
Lines 574 to 597 in e31b29c
The JS framework should be like vanilla JS, since:
PS: we also have found some upstream bug of SVG rendering in webview, which hints that we may be better to have fully control of our code. Instead we will come into no idea on solving upstream bugs.
I personally pick https://github.com/vanjs-org/van with seeing benchmark. It is also the first googled item. But we can check other ones.
The refactoring plan and work needs participation of @Enter-tainer.
It is not quite urgent, and once we have a plan, we can break refactoring into parts and merge them into main branch. The each part of code refactoring should be simple, easy to review. And they should get separated into multiple version publish, so to avoid thrushing the stability of software?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: