The Future of the View Layer
The views expressed below are my own and not those of the SproutCore core team.
Recently, Yehuda Katz and I have been making some changes to the SproutCore view layer. We’ve pulled out basic functionality into a new class called SC.CoreView, and broken the old SC.View (a behemoth) into several files based on what features they add. We also introduced SC.TemplateView, a subclass of SC.CoreView, that allows you to use Handlebars templates. 1 2
(After the Ember/SproutCore split, someone on the SproutCore team seems to have scrubbed these posts from their blog. —Ed)
Changes like these can be scary because they introduce uncertainty, but I want to assure you that the project is still headed in the same direction; we just have two additional goals:
- Reduce the learning curve for new developers
- Improve load time on low-power, low-bandwidth devices (e.g., iPad and Android tablets)
It turns out that these view changes put us on the path towards meeting both goals.
The desktop
framework, which can best be described as SproutCore’s
widget library, is its largest by far. The major reason for its size is
that we have re-implemented almost all desktop controls in JavaScript and HTML.
For example, SproutCore menu items flash when selected,
like they do in Mac OS X, and we have popovers that can anchor to
another on-screen element, like in iOS.
The downside to this sophistication is both an increase in code size and an increase in cognitive overhead for developers new to SproutCore. In particular, traditional web developers have a hard time learning how views work; they are better off reading the Cocoa guide to views than to read a book on JavaScript and DOM.
Today, when we ask developers to write SproutCore applications, we ask them to throw away their existing expertise and commit entirely to the framework. If in six months they decide it won’t meet their needs, they have to abandon almost all of their work. And it’s almost impossible to test the waters with an existing codebase, since developers must throw away their entire view layer.
Many developers don’t want or need native-style controls. They want to throw together a quick application that still feels like a website. We can bring value to these developers, too. While SproutCore’s view layer complements the controller and model layers, it doesn’t require them—indeed, the point of MVC is to encapsulate these concerns. If we can bring the sophistication of the data store and the robustness of statechart-driven apps to everyone, we should.
Here’s the thing about templates, though: they’re a better way of doing what we’ve been doing all along.
At its core, a SproutCore view is a DOM representation plus a managed layout. You need to build that DOM representation somehow, which means either multiple DOM API calls, or lots of string concatenation operations.
For example, here’s the render method for SC.RadioView:
render: function(dataSource, context) {
var theme = dataSource.get('theme');
var isSelected = dataSource.get('isSelected'),
width = dataSource.get('width'),
title = dataSource.get('title'),
value = dataSource.get('value'),
ariaLabeledBy = dataSource.get('ariaLabeledBy'),
ariaLabel = dataSource.get('ariaLabel');
context.setClass({
active: dataSource.get('isActive'),
mixed: dataSource.get('isMixed'),
sel: dataSource.get('isSelected'),
disabled: !dataSource.get('isEnabled')
});
//accessing accessibility
context.attr('role', 'radio');
context.attr('aria-checked', isSelected);
if(ariaLabel && ariaLabel !== "") {
context.attr('aria-label', ariaLabel);
}
if(ariaLabeledBy && ariaLabeledBy !== "") {
context.attr('aria-labelledby', ariaLabeledBy);
}
if (width) context.css('width', width);
context.push('<span class = "button"></span>');
context = context.begin('span').addClass('sc-button-label');
theme.labelRenderDelegate.render(dataSource, context);
context = context.end();
}
For those keeping track at home, that’s 34 lines of code to generate this:
<div class="sc-radio-button mixed" aria-checked="true" role="radio" index="0">
<span class="button"></span>
<span class="sc-button-label">Item1</span>
</div>
And that’s just to create the DOM representation. Updating it takes another 27 lines of code, and it’s not even efficient; if a single property changes, it re-renders the entire label portion of the control.
Imagine if we could instead tell the radio view to use a template:
<div {{bindClass "classNames isActive isMixed isSelected isEnabled"}}
{{bindAttr role="ariaRole"
aria-checked="ariaChecked"
aria-label="ariaLabel"
aria-labelledby="ariaLabeledBy"}}>
<span class="button"></span>
<span class="sc-button-label">
{{renderDelegate "label"}}
</span>
</div>
This is both shorter and easier to understand. But perhaps most importantly, good abstractions allow us to make optimizations once. Instead of each view trying (and failing) to optimize DOM access, and in the process introducing a rat’s nest of complicated logic, we can move the complexity to the templating layer and have every view ever written benefit from it.
We could, for example, use different optimizations for Internet Explorer and Chrome. Because views are now stating intent instead of atomic DOM operations, we can choose the fastest path based on the performance characteristics of the current environment. Decoupling allows implementers to focus on behavior and appearance, not the intricacies of DOM.
My point is this: template views are not meant as a replacement for SC.View and our rich library of controls. In fact, template views can serve to make desktop-style controls even better. If controls are easier to implement, more people will make them, and then we all benefit.
Template views are designed to integrate with existing applications, or to stand on their own if you need them to. As always, it’s important to pick the right tool for the job.
Yehuda and I have recently made fixes to SC.TemplateView that allow it to be used inside traditional view hierarchies. An updated prerelease gem with these changes is in the works, or you can find them in the master branch on GitHub.
We think there will be a lot of opportunity for existing SproutCore apps to take advantage of templates. For example, think of the many modern Mac OS X applications that use a WebView to integrate HTML content.
If you’re starting a new SproutCore application, you can decide which works best for you. If you want a web-style application or a desktop-style application (or some combination of the two), we want you to feel like a first-class citizen. And if you opt for desktop-style, we will work hard to ensure SC.TemplateView works with Greenhouse when it ships.
I will be discussing this and more at the SF SproutCore meetup, Tuesday, March 15.
Thanks to Chris Swasey, Tyler Keating, Sudarshan Bhat and Peter Wagenet for reviewing this post. I tweet at @tomdale if you want more timely updates.
Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of JavaScript Frameworks
Thomas Fuchs recently wrote about the advantages of using JavaScript micro-frameworks:
I for one welcome our new micro-framework overlords—small frameworks and libraries that do one thing only, not trying to solve each and every problem, just using pure JavaScript to do it. Easy to mix and match, and to customize to your needs.