Please add a NavOptions parameter to the NavController.navigate extension function. [171468994]

Fixed

Feature Request

Status Update

No update yet.

Description

le...@gmail.com

created issue #1

Oct 22, 2020 03:53PM

Component used: Navigation Compose

Version used: 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT

Devices/Android versions reproduced on: All

In NavHostController.kt please consider adding an extra parameter to the navigate extension function, for example:

public fun NavController.navigate(
    destinationId: Any,
    args: Bundle? = null,
    navOptions: NavOptions? = null
)

This is needed to be able to set the popUpTo parameter for clearing the BackStack, for example after displaying a sign-in page.

Comments

il...@google.com <il...@google.com> Oct 22, 2020 06:10PM

Assigned to jb...@google.com.

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #2Nov 2, 2020 08:51PM

I know that there is an API council request to change Modifier.drawLayer to Modifier.graphicsLayer` thus dropping the "draw" prefix to the modifier. I think it might be reasonable to rename the following to match the naming of the fields within the layer API:

Introduce the following:

   Modifier.drawOpacity -> Modifier.alpha
   Modifier.scale,
   Modifier.rotateX,
   Modifier.rotateY,
   Modifier.rotate (maybe rotateZ but maybe drop the Z to keep it simple?)
   Modifier.translate

I think it is reasonable to have both Modifier.offset as well as translate with the documentation indicating that translate is more effective for animated use cases. The only concern I have is if we can somehow detect several of these modifiers in a chain would be able to effectively squash them into a single layer, (ex: Modifier.alpha(0.5f).scale(2f).rotate(45) etc.). What do you think?

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #3Nov 3, 2020 05:02PM

1) you forgot to mention:
Modifier.drawShadow -> Modifier.shadow

2) I think for scale we can both overloads like
Modifier.scale(scaleX: Float, scaleY: Float)
Modifier.scale(scale: Float) = scale(scale, scale)

3) can we do similar thing for rotation? in simple cases you only want to rotate x and y, right?
Modifier.rotation(rotationX: Float, rotationY: Float, rotationZ: Float)
Modifier.rotation(rotation: Float) = rotation(rotation, rotation, 0)

4) and please, lets not add Modifier.translate() just yet. I am ok with this being available as more low level api Modifier.drawLayer() where we have more options, but not something so easy discoverable. in the doc we agreed that it could be useful to keep it for some complex cases. I am strongly convinced we shoudn't have both Modifier.offsetPx() and Modifier.translation()

5) so the decision to rename to graphicLayer() is final? I have a cl which will be affected by that:

https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/frameworks/support/+/1496274. Should I already use new name GraphicLayerScope there?

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #4Nov 5, 2020 01:06AM

And about the possible squashing, it is not really related to this topic as even now it is possible to do Modifier.drawLayer(alpha=0.5f).drawLayer(scale=2f).drawLayer(rotate=45). But yes, we could explore it in the future. I think not squashing at all is good enough for now

jb...@google.com <jb...@google.com> #5Nov 5, 2020 01:08AM

Marked as fixed.

sure we can have Modifier.shadow. The general pattern is is to drop the draw prefix and match the name of the modifier with the field on the layer itself instead of deviating with Opacity vs alpha (should change to alpha)
I am apprehensive about keeping the scale/rotation parameters separate as it is a deviation from the atomic transformation done in drawLayer currently. That is the pivot point used for scale/rotation is shared and the order of the transformations is always fixed.
Most of the time folks are only interested in the "regular" rotation which is rotateZ. I think we should have distinct rotationX/Y methods
I think we need to decouple the layer primitive from the modifier. For example, the graphics/DrawScope API doesn't deal with Modifiers at all, and the Modifier should wrap that Layer primitive instead. This would still allow for usage of translate within the Layer primitive for graphics purposes. Modifier.offset will always be slower than Modifier.translate though and force a full layout pass instead of just a quick invalidation so we are paying a performance penalty if we only expose Modifier.offsetPx
The discussion came up in this API council feedback doc regarding renaming Modifier.drawLayer to Modifier.graphicsLayer: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JBwAbh_gwssah1X21waDpbS1f7M6yNbb3V8qanTlWds/edit?ts=5f5fd265

Issue 171468994