[WIP] Dash component system support #490
Conversation
T4rk1n
force-pushed
the
dash-component-system
branch
from
6ffdb52 to
0e5454b
Compare
T4rk1n
force-pushed
the
dash-component-system
branch
from
1ee69d1 to
dd30118
Compare
dash_core_components/_checklist.py
Outdated
| def __init__( | ||
| self, | ||
| id=UNDEFINED, | ||
| options="[]", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@T4rk1n is it intentional that these empty objects are quoted ("[]", "{}") here and in ComponentProp?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, default props generation needs more testing.
T4rk1n
force-pushed
the
dash-component-system
branch
from
a18e182 to
9cd1826
Compare
| for more info.(default={ staticPlot: false, | ||
| editable: false, edits: { | ||
| annotationPosition: false, annotationTail: | ||
| false, annotationText: false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey re: #514 I'm thinking of removing these defaults, just using config: {}, as well as writing some sort of test that the PropTypes.shape we give matches the available options in the current version of plotly.js. But in this PR the default seems to be the only info about what's allowed inside config that makes it into the Python docs. How do you think we should handle this?
- bring the shape into this docstring programmatically?
- require that this shape be described explicitly in the docstring for
graphPropTypes.config(and then I'd write a test to verify that this is kept up-to-date)? - something else?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The default in the docstring come from Graph.defaultProps, if you change it to {} they will be removed.
bring the shape into this docstring programmatically?
You cannot do that on at runtime with react-docgen as nothing is evaluated just parsed. It has to be in the source. Maybe a script that fetch and format and you insert the output in the docstring, I'd imagine you'd only have to do that when you update plotly.js.
require that this shape be described explicitly in the docstring for graphPropTypes.config (and then I'd write a test to verify that this is kept up-to-date)?
I like that.
something else?
Front-end validations and keep as is with the default {}?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Come to think of it, the mypy validation for shape is shallow and not key based, it might be worthwhile to format the PropType definition in the docstring.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK cool - one way or another we can handle this in documentation. For now I'm going to take the defaults out for #514
No description provided.