Skip to content

Support RN new architecture #7576

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

Closed
wants to merge 10 commits into from
Closed

Support RN new architecture #7576

wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

yogevbd
Copy link
Collaborator

@yogevbd yogevbd commented Aug 4, 2022

No description provided.

@yogevbd yogevbd changed the title New architecture support Support new architecture Aug 4, 2022
@yogevbd yogevbd changed the title Support new architecture Support RN new architecture Aug 4, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@gaguirre gaguirre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I focused on the lib files, not the playground changes since I guess are the ones required for the new arch.

I'm wondering how did you come with all the changes for the .podspec files.
Are those changes suggested by React Native for native libs maintainers or something? Because I'd like to know more about new architecture.

ss.dependency 'React-RCTFabric'
ss.dependency 'React-Fabric'
ss.dependency 'RCT-Folly/Fabric'
reactJson = JSON.parse(File.read(File.join(__dir__, "node_modules", "react-native", "package.json")))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this could fail in a monorepo, where react-native dependency could be located in other folder than local node_modules.
Anyway, it would be very unlikely since hoisting react-native bring too many problems.

Just wondering if there is an easy way to provide a fallback in case that happens (e.g. specifying the RN version manually).

What do you think @yogevbd?

Copy link

@enahum enahum Sep 2, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

out of curiosity is this comment holding up the PR? perhaps the fallback can be about setting up an env var?

Just wondering what's pending to push this forward ;)

@aliraza-noon
Copy link
Contributor

out of curiosity are we going to support an sync api with this change ?

@xgenem
Copy link

xgenem commented Mar 9, 2023

Will this ever be supported? The new Arch is out for a while now.

@enahum
Copy link

enahum commented Apr 7, 2023

Any progress on this?

@SudoPlz
Copy link
Contributor

SudoPlz commented May 23, 2023

@yogevbd I think we should rebase this PR to #7717 (merged in master)

And then merge my Android fabric support PR #7720 into yours - this one

Any thoughts?

@SudoPlz SudoPlz mentioned this pull request May 23, 2023
@SudoPlz
Copy link
Contributor

SudoPlz commented Jul 16, 2023

@yogevbd I see tests still failing here. What's remaining to get this one merged? I remember you made progress w/ tests and they were passing, is it just a matter of pushing your new code?

@yogevbd
Copy link
Collaborator Author

yogevbd commented Aug 1, 2023

Closing in favor of #7744

@yogevbd yogevbd closed this Aug 1, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants