Class: AsyncShellLocalPipelineWorker

AsyncShellLocalPipelineWorker(host)

new AsyncShellLocalPipelineWorker(host)

Parameters:
Name Type Description
host AppShellAsyncMainFragment | AppShellAsyncChildFragment
Source:

Members

loadedFragment :AppMainFragmentInstance|AppChildFragmentInstance

Type:
  • AppMainFragmentInstance | AppChildFragmentInstance
Source:

Methods

buildFragmentRoute(routeParams, savedState, data, cb)

Called by MainRoutingPipeline to build the fragment route Uses localBuildingState to see if route already built and thus only fire param changes check and move on FORWARD PIPING AFTER LOAD
Parameters:
Name Type Description
routeParams RouteParams
savedState SavedFragmentState
data Object
cb genericFunction
Source:

cancelFragmentRoute(cb)

ONLY extra forward pipe that will be needed, cause this happens while building Consent is ONLY after successful full build
Parameters:
Name Type Description
cb genericFunction
Source:

destroyFragment(cb)

Called by MainRoutingPipeline to destroy the fragment
Parameters:
Name Type Description
cb fragmentDestroyCb
Source:

getRouteChangeConsent(cb)

GOING DOWN, only needed once. For first async loaded. Else, direct loaded after pass down of correct one CAN SOLVE ALL THIS by having fixed instance of these you know. Ha! So, not sending new. Already loaded. But that will affect logic for fragments. Yikes! SO, NO Called by MainRoutingPipeline to get the destroy consent of the fragment hosting this local pipeline worker
Parameters:
Name Type Description
cb routingPipelineConsentCb
Source:

routeMaintained()

Called by MainRoutingPipeline Inform a previously consented fragment that the route has been maintained by a parent OR It was consenting to a route where it is not being destroyed, and the consent was either approved or not. Regardless, running state valid Therefore, transition the child's state back to running RATIONALE FOR THIS STRUCTURE Imagine a route /newBlog/:blogId/addMedia The addMedia fragment is the last node, but there's the :blogId fragment that probably is rendering and managing the view of WYSIWYG editor. If all consenting powers rest on the last node, the user's unsaved work will get lost. Thus, all in destruction stack MUST consent to destruction This algorithm allows for more flexible architectures
Source: