Vue.$destroy(remove) does not trigger "detached" hook on second level children #1966
Comments
|
A possible workarround that I tried and works for me is instead of vue.$destroy(true)to call vue.$remove(function() {
vue.$destroy();
}); |
tgeorgiev
added a commit
to tgeorgiev/vue
that referenced
this issue
Dec 4, 2015
…d level children Please see issue for description about the problem and what this change is supposed to fix - vuejs#1966 I know that it doesn't look good to modify tests when they fail because of a change, but I think that the lifecycle hook order should be different than what the existing test validates. The problem is again described in the issue summary
|
Merged #1967 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I have experienced this issue where I have 3 levels of Vue components, calling
$destroyon the top most component will not trigger the detached hook on the bottom most child.By looking at the
_destroyfunction, I think that the issue is that$removeis called last and at this point, on children in the hierarchy$destroywas called, causing them to remove event hooks ($off()as part of_cleanup).I think that the removal should be brought before those cleanups, and the lifecycle order should be changed.
Evan, please excuse me if I breaking something or making faulty statement, but I couldn't anywhere when the detached hook is supposed to be called. I found one test that validates that is called after destroyed, but in my humble opinion I think that detached should be called before destroyed. After all shouldn't there be a state for a component from detached, to go back to attached, before we have destroyed the instance?
What I mean to say is that having such component hierarchy
A
-B
--C
when calling
A.$destroy, the events would bedetached
-detached
--detached
beforeDestroy
-beforeDestroy
--beforeDestroy
--destroyed
-destroyed
destroyed
You can observe it here http://jsfiddle.net/pepbu9cf/
I have a pending proposal for fix, will post soon.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: