Open aneeshsharma opened 10 months ago
Attention: 3 lines
in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.
Comparison is base (
e743904
) 71.26% compared to head (9967e6f
) 81.92%. Report is 8 commits behind head on main.
Files | Patch % | Lines |
---|---|---|
projects/components/src/table/table.component.ts | 66.66% | 3 Missing :warning: |
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
4 files ±0 316 suites ±0 32m 9s :stopwatch: +12s 1 135 tests ±0 1 135 :heavy_check_mark: ±0 0 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0 1 145 runs ±0 1 145 :heavy_check_mark: ±0 0 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0
Results for commit 9967e6f8. ± Comparison against base commit e7439043.
:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.
Instead of passing the loadingTrigger$
as metadata to the data source, we can now pass the trigger as input to the table component itself.
Description
Any changes that were external to the table that would trigger a new data fetch, couldn't be accounted for when displaying the loading state in the table. Also, since the data source is external and a stream, it is not possible for the table to know when a new data fetch might have been triggered.
So, added
loadingTrigger: Observable
to theTableDataSource
as an optional field, which can be provided by the user which should emit whenever a change happens that will trigger a new data fetch.This will require the user to provide the trigger but I couldn't find any other way for the table to know by itself if a new data fetch is going to be triggered.