Merge cache-component and nanocomponent (6.0.0)

[bcomnes]

This adds optional _load and _unload lifecycle methods to cache-component. It also removes _willUpdate since its redundant with _update (anything you can do in update you can do in didUpdate).

It also renames _{will,did}Mount to _{will,did}Render. We might remove those though, although didRender is still a handy observer free way to interact with a dom node that is freshly mounted in the page, and the on-load hooks are mounted at the same scope as willMount, so maybe those can be merged somehow.

Things left to do:

• [x] re-add onload
• [x] finalize lifecycle hooks
• [x] Update Docs
• [x] Rename to nanocomponent
• [ ] Add upgrade guide for cache-component and nano component 5
• [x] Fix tests
• [ ] Add browser tests (https://gist.github.com/bcomnes/fa4fa3a83807b4189356699c17207a0b)
• [x] Update examples
• [ ] Make examples runnable (component playground? perhaps put this off)
• [ ] merge with nanocomponent and move to choo org

[bcomnes]

Also renames this._element to this.element.

[toddself]

I definitely like render more than mount in this context since we're not dealing with a virtual dom. THis looks good!

[blahah]

render to me implies generating the graphics (like paint in the browser devtools), where mount implies attaching it to the DOM. Does that interpretation match other people's?

[blahah]

actually render comes before paint - generating the graphics in memory vs drawing on the screen

[bcomnes]

I changed it to render from mount because all cache-component does by those points is hand the fully rendered element off to the caller. It might not be mounted yet. You have to use _load to know for sure its in the dom.

In practice though with choo, its in the dom by the time didRender is called.

@yoshuawuyts and I are debating if we should keep these lifecycle hooks.

[bcomnes]

@yoshuawuyts do you want to move nanocomponent to the choo org, and I can merge this branch with that repo? Its not quite ready for release yet but we can at least get this going in the correct repo

[yoshuawuyts]

Nanocomponent is part of the choo org ✨ https://github.com/choojs/nanocomponent

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:10 AM Bret Comnes notifications@github.com wrote:

@yoshuawuyts https://github.com/yoshuawuyts do you want to move nanocomponent to the choo org, and I can merge this branch with that repo? Its not quite ready for release yet but we can at least get this going in the correct repo

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/hypermodules/cache-component/pull/18#issuecomment-314689040, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACWlelD5GHJDLKIIQovhIjCoM5En0jHUks5sNH-BgaJpZM4OQeMb .

[bcomnes]

bret: for example: we could remove the ES6 example, and put it together with the constructor bind under the same heading
09:35 bret: most of what's different is the way it's constructed, and from there it makes sense - copying the whole initial example makes it trickier to maintain I think

[yoshuawuyts]

PR here https://github.com/hypermodules/cache-component/pull/19

[toddself]

What about putting the examples up on glitch? It would make them very easily runable and people could even easily clone them to mess around?

[bcomnes]

I'm not familiar with how glitch works, but I'm open to it 👍

[toddself]

@bcomnes here's a little choo in glitch! https://glitch.com/edit/#!/choo-todo

it's like codepen, but way cooler

[bcomnes]

I was going to do a component showcase but that sounds easier tbh

[bcomnes]

Closing and moving over to https://github.com/choojs/nanocomponent/pull/38