Size Change: +155 B (0%)

Total Size: 1.4 MB

_{compressed-size-action}

See #27012 where, for the server side rendering I implemented logic to detect recursion in nested blocks by adding and removing the block to a stack.

• Check if the block that's about to be rendered is already being rendered.
• If it isn't already being rendered. ie It's safe to render
  • add it to the stack of blocks being rendered.
  • render the block
  • pop it from the stack
• else don't render it

See #27612 for my original issue and test case data. The template part has a slug, which is unique.

The template part has a slug, which is unique

See reference below. Template parts are also a function of the theme, so that needs to be part of the identifier.

Thanks for getting this PR started. It would be good to solve #28405 (comment), as you've pointed out, before generalising this server-side solution.

Edit: fix opened at #28461.

@bobbingwide, thank you for the helpful comment. It aligns with what @carlomanf commented in #28405 (comment) in relation to Reusable block:

#26951 solved this by unsetting the block from the static variable after the end of the render. It should be an easy fix I think.

We might as well merge the editor part for now and tackle the server-side separately based on the implementation you shared.

@gziolo, can I help with this PR in any way?

Feel free to take it over. I won't have time to work on it this week.

Feel free to take it over. I won't have time to work on it this week.

Will do!

This is how it looks with template parts nested in themselves when browsing in the template parts view on the Edit Site page:

It behaves a bit strange for the template part that is nested inside another template part, but it all makes sense. I would say it's an anti-pattern in the first place to nest the same template part inside itself so it doesn't explode but the result is random that should raise the flag for the theme author 😄

@aristath and @ntsekouras – this PR is ready for review and testing. It means we have Reusable Block and Template Parts covered. What else is missing?

It means we have Reusable Block and Template Parts covered. What else is missing?

Post Content is missing.

@mcsf and @ntsekouras - anything left to rework here?

Interesting, 5 unit tests fail on CI. I will investigate that and fix it before merging this PR..

Interesting, 5 unit tests fail on CI. I will investigate that and fix it before merging this PR.

It looks like there were some changes introduced in #29333. The hook uses now useSelect call to retrieve the name of the block from the clientId. I need to understand better why this change was introduced.