Doesn't work on components without a JS class in 3.13

[knownasilya]

#293 (comment)

Solution would be to auto generate an empty JS class for components that don't have one.

[webark]

😭

[webark]

umm.. yea. So to maintain backwards compatibility, we'd have to dump an empty component file in if there was non for each template. The difficulty there is that due to the lax resolver, components can be anywhere, so it ends up dumping components next to route templates.

[webark]

I just won't be able to look into this until next week :(

[webark]

And with the new version, we are requiring "template only" components to have to use the this.styleNamespace property in the templates to grab that string. So one would have to modify all template only components.

[webark]

https://github.com/emberjs/ember.js/blob/151d8c57da2929dc5ff20e336518d6ea2d83d992/packages/%40ember/engine/index.js#L528

it looks like it's still getting registered, I wonder if you could pull it out of that.

[webark]

@knownasilya might have a fix for this. We'll see if it suffices for the mean time.

[webark]

Shoot. Ok. well, have to spend a little more time later.

[lifeart]

@knownasilya is it possible to assign styleNamespace using template ast-transform?

<div class="{{styleNamespace}}"></div>

-> AST

<div class="app_components_my-component"></div>

or kinda.

[webark]

@lifeart yea. that parts easy, but there’s is no way to distinguish route templates and component templates, or if a component template is going to need that or not at build time.

[lifeart]

@webark during transform time we can figure out template type, based on file name & location.

[webark]

you could have a template that’s “app/posts/author-comment/template.hbs” and call that with {{posts/author-comment}}

so..

1. so you can do something like “if has no route or component file”. But this would still pick up route templates that didn’t need a route.js or templates that get loaded into a different components.

2. only support classic and the new co location that just came out. But this would leave existing pod apps still broken. It also would not account for template sharing.

neither of those are great options. I would also be much more error prone to try to add this to templates in addon’s due to how they are structured as well.