WIP feat(router): ability to use classe/module as view model

[bigopon]

Changes:

• For build plan step: previously we determine activation strategy by comparing moduleId of previous instruction and next view port config of the same view port name. This was simple when it is only either string or null. And 2 different view model factories could actually point to the same view model class, it needs to be resolved in advance. To do this without destroying readability, I converted the _buildNavigationPlan to async function. This will lead to slightly bigger build, but we can start distributing es2018 so folks can use native async/await. And I took the opportunity to convert a lot of promises to async/await for better overall readability too.
• For NavigationInstruction.prototype.addViewPortInstruction, overload it to accept a view port name and a partial view port config instead of 4 primitive paramters. This makes it easier to pass view model around and keep the API clean. (Should we also deprecate/remove the old API?)
• LoadRouteStep: With the addition of viewModel property on the config, templating-router Router needs to be updated to account for this. I will add a link to specific lines that address this in near future
• To be updated...

TODO:

• [ ] convert templating-router to TS and adopt the changes here
• [ ] unit test
• [ ] integration test

@davismj @EisenbergEffect

[fkleuver]

For readability/maintainability this is nothing but improvement, no question there. Some of this should have happened a long time ago, but it's good to see it happening now :) I have a vague gut feeling about the switch to async/await that timings are going to be affected. It makes it feel like a somewhat risky PR. But the long term benefit can be really big. Looking forward to those integration tests 😆

[EisenbergEffect]

Big thanks to @bigopon and @davismj for breathing a lot of new life like this into the router over the last several months. This looks like a nice set of improvements (in addition to the new capability). I want to make sure that @davismj reviews this thoroughly and that you are aligned on whether to use the viewModel name for the property. I think Matt has proposed a different name for use in the vNext API and I'm wondering if we should try to align the names or if it doesn't matter too much (since router is probably going to be the biggest felt breaking change in vNext).

[bigopon]

@davismj I've rebased and updated dependency route recognizer. It's working good

[tmueller]

Came here from https://discourse.aurelia.io/t/discussion-bundler-friendly-aurelia/959/17. Any news on this?

[bigopon]

@tmueller This work has been merged. It's now waiting for some checks and reviews, and I'm working with @davismj here https://github.com/aurelia/templating-router/pull/84 to complete this feature.

[bigopon]

Closing this as it has been merged in another PR. Thanks to @tmueller for reminding

[tmueller]

Thanks @bigopon for the fast response :)