Skip to content

3.2 updates #1157

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

Merged
merged 19 commits into from
Aug 9, 2021
Merged

3.2 updates #1157

merged 19 commits into from
Aug 9, 2021

Conversation

yyx990803
Copy link
Member

  • Added dedicated API pages for SFC spec, tooling & features
  • Added "Vue and Web Components" section
  • various 3.2 features

- Updated Single File Components guide section
- Added dedicated SFC spec & tooling sections in API references
- Added dedicated API references for `<script setup>` and `<style>` features

- In dev mode, the compiler will try to infer corresponding runtime validation from the types. For example here `foo: String` is inferred from the `foo: string` type. If the type is a reference to an imported type, the inferred result will be `foo: null` (equal to `any` type) since the compiler does not have information of external files.

- In prod mode, the compiler will generate the array format declaration to reduce bundle size (the props here will be compiled into `['msg']`)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I didn't know this! 🔥

Copy link
Member

@NataliaTepluhina NataliaTepluhina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@yyx990803 great work! I've added a bunch of minor nitpicks here and there

# Effect Scope API <Badge text="3.2+" />

:::info
Effect scope is an advanced API primarily intended for library authors. For details on how to leverage this API, please consult its corresponding [RFC](https://github.com/vuejs/rfcs/blob/master/active-rfcs/0041-reactivity-effect-scope.md).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@yyx990803 should we eventually move the RFC to the Guide section of the docs? Definitely not the scope of the current PR but we can create a follow-up after 3.2 is released

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe. I want to think about where it should be fit into the doc structure though, maybe a section for "advanced reactivity patterns".

Co-authored-by: Natalia Tepluhina <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Adrià Fontcuberta <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Eduardo San Martin Morote <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

@skirtles-code skirtles-code left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some suggested tweaks from me. Let me know if anything I've suggested needs clarification.

@bencodezen
Copy link
Member

@yyx990803 Should this PR be targeting next rather than master?

@yyx990803
Copy link
Member Author

yyx990803 commented Aug 9, 2021

@bencodezen this should land on master since we are releasing 3.2 before we finish the new design. We will rebase next to include this.

@yyx990803 yyx990803 merged commit 9d759d9 into master Aug 9, 2021
@yyx990803 yyx990803 deleted the 3.2 branch August 9, 2021 19:54
yyx990803 added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 11, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants