This change changes the priority order of static styling.
Current priority:
```
(least priority)
- Static
- Component
- Directives
- Template
- Dynamic Binding
- Component
- Map/Interpolation
- Property
- Directives
- Map/Interpolation
- Property
- Template
- Map/Interpolation
- Property
(highest priority)
```
The issue with the above priority is this use case:
```
<div style="color: red;" directive-which-sets-color-blue>
```
In the above case the directive will win and the resulting color will be `blue`. However a small change of adding interpolation to the example like so. (Style interpolation is coming in https://github.com/angular/angular/pull/34202)
```
<div style="color: red; width: {{exp}}px" directive-which-sets-color-blue>
```
Changes the priority from static binding to interpolated binding which means now the resulting color is `red`. It is very surprising that adding an unrelated interpolation and style can change the `color` which was not changed. To fix that we need to make sure that the static values are associated with priority of the source (directive or template) where they were declared. The new resulting priority is:
```
(least priority)
- Component
- Static
- Map/Interpolation
- Property
- Directives
- Static
- Map/Interpolation
- Property
- Template
- Static
- Map/Interpolation
- Property
(highest priority)
```
PR Close#34938
`bindingIndex` stores the current location of the bindings in the
template function. Because it used to be stored in `LView` that `LView`
was not reentrant. This could happen if a binding was a getter and had
a side-effect of calling `detectChanges()`.
By moving the `bindingIndex` to `LFrame` where all of the global state
is kept in reentrant way we correct the issue.
PR Close#33235
ivy's bindingUpdated instruction is using the assertNotEqual check to make
sure that NO_CHANGE value (of type Object) is not passed as a value to be
dirty-checked. In practice it means that any value passed as a binding
value would be compared to the NO_CHANGE object.
It turns out that the assertNotEqual is using == and given
that binding values are of different type and we always compare it to the
NO_CHANGE object we were doing lots of type coercion. It resulted in calls
to expensive types conversions and calls to Object.toString().
A profiler reported ~15% of the self time spent in the assertNotEqual
but it turns out that removing type coercion speeds up Material Chips with
input scenario much more (~40ms down to ~20ms).
This PR introduces new assert method `assertNotSame` that uses strict equality
check. The new assertion is used in binding instructions to compare to
NO_CHANGE object reference.
PR Close#29470
- Removes CONTAINER_INDEX
- LView[PARENT] now contains LContainer when necessary
- Removes now unused arguments to methods after refactor
PR Close#28382
