Skip to content

feat(tabs): add input to opt out of pagination #17409

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 17, 2019

Conversation

crisbeto
Copy link
Member

Currently the tabs pagination works automatically by measuring the size of the tab header to figure out whether to show pagination. This measuring can be expensive because it triggers a page layout and might not necessarily be required if the page won't have enough tabs to paginate through.

These changes add an input and an option to the injection token to allow consumers to opt out of the pagination, if they know that they won't need it.

Fixes #17317.

@crisbeto crisbeto added P2 The issue is important to a large percentage of users, with a workaround target: major This PR is targeted for the next major release labels Oct 15, 2019
@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement label Oct 15, 2019
@crisbeto
Copy link
Member Author

Setting this to P2 because it's required for AIO. cc @gkalpak

@crisbeto crisbeto added this to the 9.0.0 milestone Oct 15, 2019
@crisbeto crisbeto force-pushed the 17317/tabs-pagination-disable branch from 943afd1 to 98d4e80 Compare October 16, 2019 15:49
@crisbeto
Copy link
Member Author

The feedback has been addressed @jelbourn.

Copy link
Member

@jelbourn jelbourn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Could you change this to use coerceBooleanProperty in a follow-up?

@jelbourn jelbourn added pr: lgtm action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker labels Oct 16, 2019
@ngbot
Copy link

ngbot bot commented Oct 16, 2019

I see that you just added the pr: merge ready label, but the following checks are still failing:
    failure status "ci/circleci: api_golden_checks" is failing

If you want your PR to be merged, it has to pass all the CI checks.

If you can't get the PR to a green state due to flakes or broken master, please try rebasing to master and/or restarting the CI job. If that fails and you believe that the issue is not due to your change, please contact the caretaker and ask for help.

Currently the tabs pagination works automatically by measuring the size of the tab header to figure out whether to show pagination. This measuring can be expensive because it triggers a page layout and might not necessarily be required if the page won't have enough tabs to paginate through.

These changes add an input and an option to the injection token to allow consumers to opt out of the pagination, if they know that they won't need it.

Fixes angular#17317.
@crisbeto crisbeto force-pushed the 17317/tabs-pagination-disable branch from 98d4e80 to 23ac073 Compare October 16, 2019 20:16
@mmalerba mmalerba merged commit bb9a3a8 into angular:master Oct 17, 2019
@angular-automatic-lock-bot
Copy link

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

This action has been performed automatically by a bot.

@angular-automatic-lock-bot angular-automatic-lock-bot bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 17, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement P2 The issue is important to a large percentage of users, with a workaround target: major This PR is targeted for the next major release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MatPaginatedTabHeader has performance problems (forced synchronous layout).
5 participants