feat(next): ctx.isPrerendered

[florian-lefebvre]

Changes

• Adds a new prerender property to the Astro context

Testing

Adds test

Docs

Changeset, withastro/docs#9301

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 2fe97bc

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

This PR is blocked because it contains a minor changeset. A reviewer will merge this at the next release if approved.

[florian-lefebvre]

I wonder if the property should actually be called ctx.prerendered?

[ematipico]

I wonder if the property should actually be called ctx.prerendered?

We already expose RouteData.prerender to integrations. Better to be consistent

[florian-lefebvre]

idk, prerender is kind of an internal thing, i think we're in the same situation as routePattern for route.route. I'd say the most important is to have something intuitive to use. I'm a bit concerned about confusing people between export const prerender and context.prerender, hence my proposal

[ematipico]

I usually go for verbose names, so I like isPrerendered, but prerendered is also fine. Any name is fine for me, the code looks good :)

[florian-lefebvre]

Cool! I'll wait for docs review for the naming then

[sarah11918]

Here's maybe an idea!

[ascorbic]

I agree with @ematipico here. isPrerendered is my favourite, with prerendered as second choice.

[florian-lefebvre]

I know @Fryuni was thinking about something like isPrerendering. Would you mind explaining why you think it's better than isPrerendered?

[Fryuni]

I might have this preference due to the language difference.

ctx.prerender for me is fine because it is the configuration, so we keep the consistency

ctx.prerendered seems wrong to me because the route has not been pre-rendered, that value is used as part of the rendering process. It reads more as the common request of allowing middleware to run at request-time for pre-rendered routes, in that case the route was pre-rendered, in the past, so it would be correct. But in this case when you read a flag name prerendered, in the past, nothing has been rendered yet, which is what doesn't seem right to me.

ctx.prerendering/ctx.isPrerendering would match what is actually happening at the moment. So those would be second place in my preference (after ctx.prerender which I prefer)

[ascorbic]

@Fryuni I think it's probably a language thing. In this context it means "this is a prerendered route", rather than "this route has been prerendered". A property of the route, rather than a state.

[florian-lefebvre]

Yeah I agree with Matt there. I think ctx.prerender is going to be too confusing tbh so I'm against this one