Replace repeatOnAjax with explicit onetime#3442
Merged
Conversation
yakov116
reviewed
Aug 9, 2020
| waitForDomReady: false, | ||
|
|
||
| /** Whether to re-run `init` on pages loaded via AJAX. @default true */ | ||
| repeatOnAjax: false, |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Want to give an example of using oneTime here?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thought about it, but it's not necessary
Member
|
What's the benefit of this change? |
Member
Author
|
Sorry, I didn't add context: In short, pages can change via ajax, but if That logic was never correct; our real intent was only to prevent duplicate execution on the same document, hence the |
Member
|
Makes sense. I would probably have added a |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Waiting for sindresorhus/onetime#12
Can be reviewed. Doesn't need testing but it's worth a look just in case features need that old specific behavior (unlikely)