dust.onLoad is bad design
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- JavaScript
- Stars
- 2.9k
- Forks
- 461
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
If my application has multiple Dust consumers, which are independent of each other and want to have different onLoad implementations, there is no good way to satisfy that.
Because partial names can be dynamic, their resolution cannot happen during compile phase, and therefore, I cannot wrap the compile call with set-and-restore-onLoad call.
And because rendering is asynchronous, I cannot wrap render call either.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by tracing how dust.onLoad is used across the compile and asynchronous render entry points, especially when partial names are dynamic. Define what independent Dust consumers should be able to configure and how completion would be verified without relying on set-and-restore behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- javascript
- Domain
- web-dev
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100