Add __STORYBOOK_CLIENT_API__ for external tools
#3058
Conversation
joscha
changed the title
__STORYBOOK_CLIENT_API for external tools__STORYBOOK_CLIENT_API__ for external tools
|
cc @timhaines |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3058 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 36.87% 36.86% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 417 417
Lines 9849 9853 +4
Branches 830 839 +9
==========================================
Hits 3632 3632
+ Misses 5750 5736 -14
- Partials 467 485 +18
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Yes, interested to know if this helps Percy and if there is more that would be needed at your end @timhaines |
| const clientApi = new ClientApi(context); | ||
| export const { storiesOf, setAddon, addDecorator, clearDecorators, getStorybook } = clientApi; | ||
| // Provide access to external scripts | ||
| window.__STORYBOOK_CLIENT_API__ = clientApi; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@tmeasday Is there any particular reason to do that only inside isBrowser branch?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess window is not defined in the other context (i.e. jest). Are you thinking we could add it to global.__STORYBOOK_CLIENT_API__?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would like to use it from jsdom, where window is actually defined and is not the same as global. My usecase is to get stories tree from node.js script
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This works in JSDOM. Have you tested it? Storybook doesn't know the difference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I literally tested this yesterday, that's why I feel quite confident about this ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess I did 😊
When was that line added? That doesn't seem helpful to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
JSDOM is trying to pretend to be a browser, why would we want to treat it differently?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably because it lacks non-dom api like postmessage that is used in channels
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, fair enough.
Well I think it is fine for this particular check just be something if (typeof window !== 'undefined') but I suspect there will be other use cases for JSDOM where having isBrowser === true might be helpful. If it breaks however I guess we leave it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also any thoughts on #3058 (comment)
|
Would it perhaps also be useful to expose the channel, perhaps on |
|
Feel free to add as long as you're going to use it =) |
|
@Hypnosphi => #3243 |
So tools like Chromatic and others that interact with the client API can work with storybooks that haven't injected any code.
I would love to refactor this code from preview into core but I will leave to a later PR.
How to test
Check that
__STORYBOOK_CLIENT_API__is defined in each example app.