We have some internal proxies for all of the Jasmine functions, as well as some other helpers. This code hasn't been touched in more than 5 years, it can lead to confusion and it isn't really necessary since the same can be achieved using Jasmine.
These changes remove most of the code and clean up our existing unit tests.
PR Close#42177
NOTE: This change deletes code and creates a BROKEN SHA. If reverting this SHA needs to be reverted with the next SHA to get back into a valid state.
PR Close#34616
This change moves information from instructions to declarative position:
- `ɵɵallocHostVars(vars)` => `DirectiveDef.hostVars`
- `ɵɵelementHostAttrs(attrs)` => `DirectiveDef.hostAttrs`
When merging directives it is necessary to know about `hostVars` and `hostAttrs`. Before this change the information was stored in the `hostBindings` function. This was problematic, because in order to get to the information the `hostBindings` would have to be executed. In order for `hostBindings` to be executed the directives would have to be instantiated. This means that the directive instantiation would happen before we had knowledge about the `hostAttrs` and as a result the directive could observe in the constructor that not all of the `hostAttrs` have been applied. This further complicates the runtime as we have to apply `hostAttrs` in parts over many invocations.
`ɵɵallocHostVars` was unnecessarily complicated because it would have to update the `LView` (and Blueprint) while existing directives are already executing. By moving it out of `hostBindings` function we can access it statically and we can create correct `LView` (and Blueprint) in a single pass.
This change only changes how the instructions are generated, but does not change the runtime much. (We cheat by emulating the old behavior by calling `ɵɵallocHostVars` and `ɵɵelementHostAttrs`) Subsequent change will refactor the runtime to take advantage of the static information.
PR Close#34683
change the existing implementation from using
```
string.split(/\s+/);
```
to a char scan which performers the same thing.
The reason why `split(/\s+/)` is slow is that:
- `/\s+/` allocates new `RegExp` every time this code executes.
- `RegExp` scans are a lot more expensive because they are more powerful.
PR Close#33326
Kristiyan Kostadinov
Joey Perrott
Miško Hevery