refactor: Do not manually call connectedCallback #103
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rschristian
force-pushed
the
refactor/do-no-manually-trigger-connected-callback
branch
from
fad26b8 to
20c0460
Compare
JoviDeCroock
approved these changes
Sep 4, 2025
rschristian
force-pushed
the
refactor/do-no-manually-trigger-connected-callback
branch
from
8f43e79 to
ea58f97
Compare
rschristian
deleted the
refactor/do-no-manually-trigger-connected-callback
branch
This was referenced Sep 4, 2025
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #69
Supercedes #71
This is a bit of a bad one tbh.
#44 added this manual call of
connectedCallback()upon the first time a property is set but this objectively the wrong behavior: that method is meant to only ever be called once and only upon insertion into the document. We're often calling it twice and prior to insertion.This hopefully won't cause any problems for folks as it's internal-ish behavior, but even so, I'd want to push this out as a non-breaking change. It diverges from the web platform and expectations so greatly that this should be considered a mistake and not intended behavior, IMO.
#69 (comment) called this out, thanks!