nextTick 在 vue 2.5 和 vue 2.6 之間有什麼不一樣

簡單瞭解 $nextTick

咱們知道對於 Vue 來講，從數據變化到執行 DOM 更新，這個過程是異步的，發生在下一個 tick 裏。

它會建立一個更新隊列 queue，隊列中維護着各個屬性的 watcher，在須要時執行、更新它們。

在下次 DOM 更新循環結束以後執行延遲迴調。在修改數據以後當即使用這個方法，獲取更新後的 DOM。

Vue.nextTick()
    .then(function () {
    	// DOM 更新了
	})
複製代碼

那麼針對這樣一個核心功能，Vue 2.5 與 Vue 2.6 的實現有什麼不一樣呢？

可能須要你簡單瞭解下 js 的 event loop。模擬實現 JS 引擎：深刻了解 JS機制 以及 Microtask and Macrotask

Vue 2.5 nextTick 實現

在 Vue 2.5 中，nextTick 的實現是 microTimerFunc、macroTimerFunc 組合實現的，具體見源碼。

import { noop } from 'shared/util'
import { handleError } from './error'
import { isIOS, isNative } from './env'

const callbacks = []
let pending = false

function flushCallbacks () {
  pending = false
  const copies = callbacks.slice(0)
  callbacks.length = 0
  for (let i = 0; i < copies.length; i++) {
    copies[i]()
  }
}

// Here we have async deferring wrappers using both microtasks and (macro) tasks.
// In < 2.4 we used microtasks everywhere, but there are some scenarios where
// microtasks have too high a priority and fire in between supposedly
// sequential events (e.g. #4521, #6690) or even between bubbling of the same
// event (#6566). However, using (macro) tasks everywhere also has subtle problems
// when state is changed right before repaint (e.g. #6813, out-in transitions).
// Here we use microtask by default, but expose a way to force (macro) task when
// needed (e.g. in event handlers attached by v-on).
let microTimerFunc
let macroTimerFunc
let useMacroTask = false

// Determine (macro) task defer implementation.
// Technically setImmediate should be the ideal choice, but it's only available
// in IE. The only polyfill that consistently queues the callback after all DOM
// events triggered in the same loop is by using MessageChannel.
/* istanbul ignore if */
if (typeof setImmediate !== 'undefined' && isNative(setImmediate)) {
  macroTimerFunc = () => {
    setImmediate(flushCallbacks)
  }
} else if (typeof MessageChannel !== 'undefined' && (
  isNative(MessageChannel) ||
  // PhantomJS
  MessageChannel.toString() === '[object MessageChannelConstructor]'
)) {
  const channel = new MessageChannel()
  const port = channel.port2
  channel.port1.onmessage = flushCallbacks
  macroTimerFunc = () => {
    port.postMessage(1)
  }
} else {
  /* istanbul ignore next */
  macroTimerFunc = () => {
    setTimeout(flushCallbacks, 0)
  }
}

// Determine microtask defer implementation.
/* istanbul ignore next, $flow-disable-line */
if (typeof Promise !== 'undefined' && isNative(Promise)) {
  const p = Promise.resolve()
  microTimerFunc = () => {
    p.then(flushCallbacks)
    // in problematic UIWebViews, Promise.then doesn't completely break, but
    // it can get stuck in a weird state where callbacks are pushed into the
    // microtask queue but the queue isn't being flushed, until the browser
    // needs to do some other work, e.g. handle a timer. Therefore we can
    // "force" the microtask queue to be flushed by adding an empty timer.
    if (isIOS) setTimeout(noop)
  }
} else {
  // fallback to macro
  microTimerFunc = macroTimerFunc
}

/** * Wrap a function so that if any code inside triggers state change, * the changes are queued using a (macro) task instead of a microtask. */
export function withMacroTask (fn: Function): Function {
  return fn._withTask || (fn._withTask = function () {
    useMacroTask = true
    const res = fn.apply(null, arguments)
    useMacroTask = false
    return res
  })
}

export function nextTick (cb?: Function, ctx?: Object) {
  let _resolve
  callbacks.push(() => {
    if (cb) {
      try {
        cb.call(ctx)
      } catch (e) {
        handleError(e, ctx, 'nextTick')
      }
    } else if (_resolve) {
      _resolve(ctx)
    }
  })
  if (!pending) {
    pending = true
    if (useMacroTask) {
      macroTimerFunc()
    } else {
      microTimerFunc()
    }
  }
  // $flow-disable-line
  if (!cb && typeof Promise !== 'undefined') {
    return new Promise(resolve => {
      _resolve = resolve
    })
  }
}
複製代碼

比較關鍵的幾行

let useMacroTask = false

if (!pending) {
    pending = true
    if (useMacroTask) {
    	macroTimerFunc()
    } else {
    	microTimerFunc()
    }
}
複製代碼

這裏說明，Vue 2.5 會優先使用 microTimerFunc，若是存在兼容性問題，則降級爲 macroTimerFunc。

microTimerFunc 的實現：原生的 Promise；

macroTimerFunc 的實現：setImmediate || MessageChannel || setTimeout。

同時 Vue 2.5 的 next-tick 還對外暴露了兩個函數：nextTick 以及 withMacroTask （用於處理一些 DOM 交互事件，如 v-on 綁定的事件回調函數的處理，會強制走 macro task）。

補充，更詳細的能夠參考 @marsprince 完成的vue2.6更新研究之nextTick老是使用microTask。

通讀源碼，發現邏輯很清晰，也完成優雅漸進，那麼發什麼了致使 Vue 在 2.6 對其進行了 fix 呢？來看一段 Vue 2.6 的註釋

// Here we have async deferring wrappers using microtasks.
// In 2.5 we used (macro) tasks (in combination with microtasks).
// However, it has subtle problems when state is changed right before repaint
// (e.g. #6813, out-in transitions).
// Also, using (macro) tasks in event handler would cause some weird behaviors
// that cannot be circumvented (e.g. #7109, #7153, #7546, #7834, #8109).
// So we now use microtasks everywhere, again.
// A major drawback of this tradeoff is that there are some scenarios
// where microtasks have too high a priority and fire in between supposedly
// sequential events (e.g. #4521, #6690, which have workarounds)
// or even between bubbling of the same event (#6566).
複製代碼

主要闡明瞭兩個問題：

• 在重繪以前狀態發生改變會有輕微的問題；
• 利用 macro task 處理事件時，會產生一系列沒法規避的詭異問題。

簡單地描述下這兩個問題：

第一個問題，具體見圖

試一試，具體描述見github.com/vuejs/vue/i…，本質上就是在 css 中定義了 @media 媒體查詢，js 中 window 監聽了 resize 事件，那麼當觸發固定閾值時，state 發生了變化、樣式也須要重繪，這就產生了問題。

第二個問題，通常能夠歸納爲因爲使用 macroTask 處理 DOM 操做，會使得有些時候觸發和執行之間間隔太大，例如在移動端，單擊的 handler 和音頻播放功能不在同一 tick 裏。

Vue 2.6 nextTick 實現

因爲以上問題，因此在 Vue 2.6 實現過程當中，利用 microtasks 代替以前的解決方案，具體見源碼。

/* @flow */
/* globals MutationObserver */

import { noop } from 'shared/util'
import { handleError } from './error'
import { isIE, isIOS, isNative } from './env'

const callbacks = []
let pending = false

function flushCallbacks () {
  pending = false
  const copies = callbacks.slice(0)
  callbacks.length = 0
  for (let i = 0; i < copies.length; i++) {
    copies[i]()
  }
}

// Here we have async deferring wrappers using microtasks.
// In 2.5 we used (macro) tasks (in combination with microtasks).
// However, it has subtle problems when state is changed right before repaint
// (e.g. #6813, out-in transitions).
// Also, using (macro) tasks in event handler would cause some weird behaviors
// that cannot be circumvented (e.g. #7109, #7153, #7546, #7834, #8109).
// So we now use microtasks everywhere, again.
// A major drawback of this tradeoff is that there are some scenarios
// where microtasks have too high a priority and fire in between supposedly
// sequential events (e.g. #4521, #6690, which have workarounds)
// or even between bubbling of the same event (#6566).
let timerFunc

// The nextTick behavior leverages the microtask queue, which can be accessed
// via either native Promise.then or MutationObserver.
// MutationObserver has wider support, however it is seriously bugged in
// UIWebView in iOS >= 9.3.3 when triggered in touch event handlers. It
// completely stops working after triggering a few times... so, if native
// Promise is available, we will use it:
/* istanbul ignore next, $flow-disable-line */
if (typeof Promise !== 'undefined' && isNative(Promise)) {
  const p = Promise.resolve()
  timerFunc = () => {
    p.then(flushCallbacks)
    // In problematic UIWebViews, Promise.then doesn't completely break, but
    // it can get stuck in a weird state where callbacks are pushed into the
    // microtask queue but the queue isn't being flushed, until the browser
    // needs to do some other work, e.g. handle a timer. Therefore we can
    // "force" the microtask queue to be flushed by adding an empty timer.
    if (isIOS) setTimeout(noop)
  }
} else if (!isIE && typeof MutationObserver !== 'undefined' && (
  isNative(MutationObserver) ||
  // PhantomJS and iOS 7.x
  MutationObserver.toString() === '[object MutationObserverConstructor]'
)) {
  // Use MutationObserver where native Promise is not available,
  // e.g. PhantomJS, iOS7, Android 4.4
  // (#6466 MutationObserver is unreliable in IE11)
  let counter = 1
  const observer = new MutationObserver(flushCallbacks)
  const textNode = document.createTextNode(String(counter))
  observer.observe(textNode, {
    characterData: true
  })
  timerFunc = () => {
    counter = (counter + 1) % 2
    textNode.data = String(counter)
  }
} else if (typeof setImmediate !== 'undefined' && isNative(setImmediate)) {
  // Fallback to setImmediate.
  // Techinically it leverages the (macro) task queue,
  // but it is still a better choice than setTimeout.
  timerFunc = () => {
    setImmediate(flushCallbacks)
  }
} else {
  // Fallback to setTimeout.
  timerFunc = () => {
    setTimeout(flushCallbacks, 0)
  }
}

export function nextTick (cb?: Function, ctx?: Object) {
  let _resolve
  callbacks.push(() => {
    if (cb) {
      try {
        cb.call(ctx)
      } catch (e) {
        handleError(e, ctx, 'nextTick')
      }
    } else if (_resolve) {
      _resolve(ctx)
    }
  })
  if (!pending) {
    pending = true
    timerFunc()
  }
  // $flow-disable-line
  if (!cb && typeof Promise !== 'undefined') {
    return new Promise(resolve => {
      _resolve = resolve
    })
  }
}
複製代碼

Vue 2.6 利用最典型的兩個 microTask，promise.then 以及 Mutation observers，並添加 setImmediate 、setTimeout，做爲降級方案。

只對外暴露了一個接口 next-tick，同時用 microTask 來處理 event handler。這種實現方法解決了上述問題，可是也有一個很明顯的弊端。因爲 microTask 的優先級過高，致使當連續觸發 event 事件時產生問題，具體見註釋。