feat(client): inject slot declaration lifetimes

This commit is contained in:
imccyu
2026-08-05 23:38:29 +08:00
parent bb53e25ed0
commit 86965b053c
100 changed files with 1065 additions and 837 deletions
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ After the view ring dissolved into the slot system, the client kept exactly one
The tool ring is gone as independent infrastructure: a tool row is a **keyed child slot each view declares for itself**, and the client has exactly one registration model. The justification above was hollow — a keyed slot's *key space* is already runtime-open (SlotMap declares slots, never keys; the ask-user composer's `key: 'question'` was the precedent), so the open tool-name set fits `entryKey` dispatch natively.
Shipped shape (current-state narrative also in the [architecture note](2026-07-19-gui-web-client-architecture.md)): the chat entry's `children` table declares `'conversation.chat.toolview'` (keyed/session); the render site dispatches per row via `entryKey: toolName` with `GenericToolCard` as the call-site `fallback` (the default card is domain property; the fallback option is ordinary renderSlot grammar). The owner payload is the uniform `ToolRowOwnerProps` (`callId`/`toolName`/`block`/`openDetails` — details being a session-level facility, not chat-private), and `ToolRowProps` pre-composes it with the session standard kit for registrant components. A registrant is a plain plugin: `ctx.slots.register({ name: 'conversation.chat.toolview', key: '<tool>', inject? }, Row)` with `inject: ['slots', 'conversation']` as the load-order seam — apply mounts `ConversationService` *after* the chat registration, so the service being present guarantees the slot is declared, by construction. The bash sample is the third-party-posture exemplar and paints the same ToolRow chrome as Think (`Bash · {description}`). Trajectory/waterfall toolview slots share this exact shape (names fixed by the slot-naming discipline `<domain>.<entry>.<hole>`, one shared owner type) and land with their own row render sites — RendersCheck rejects a declaration nobody renders, so the type system, not convention, blocks early empty declarations.
Shipped shape (current-state narrative also in the [architecture note](2026-07-19-gui-web-client-architecture.md)): the chat entry's `children` table declares `'conversation.chat.toolview'` (keyed/session); the render site dispatches per row via `entryKey: toolName` with `GenericToolCard` as the call-site `fallback` (the default card is domain property; the fallback option is ordinary renderSlot grammar). The owner payload is the uniform `ToolRowOwnerProps` (`callId`/`toolName`/`block`/`openDetails` — details being a session-level facility, not chat-private), and `ToolRowProps` pre-composes it with the session standard kit for registrant components. A registrant is a plain plugin using `ctx.slots.inject('conversation.chat.toolview', () => ctx.slots.register({ name: 'conversation.chat.toolview', key: '<tool>', inject? }, Row))`; the declaration itself governs activation and replacement, without a false `ConversationService` edge ([decision](2026-08-05-slot-declaration-injection.md)). The bash sample is the third-party-posture exemplar and paints the same ToolRow chrome as Think (`Bash · {description}`). Trajectory/waterfall toolview slots share this exact shape (names fixed by the slot-naming discipline `<domain>.<entry>.<hole>`, one shared owner type) and land with their own row render sites — RendersCheck rejects a declaration nobody renders, so the type system, not convention, blocks early empty declarations.
Registry-era responsibilities all have successor homes: inject caching and row error isolation ride the framework renderer (entry×scope cache, per-entry `SlotErrorBoundary`); subscribe/getVersion ride the slot core's per-key version machinery; the future "store seat" is the ordinary store seat keyed slots already have (interaction-draft durability is its first named consumer); miss fallback is the call-site `fallback` option.
@@ -34,4 +34,4 @@ Four behavioral deltas were accepted deliberately, not overlooked. Cross-view ap
## Consequences
The client has one registration model; auditing who renders tool rows = reading register calls, the same audit as every other slot. Registrants get the framework's error isolation, inject caching, and store seat for free — no capability ships twice. The costs are the accepted semantic changes above (chiefly: per-view registration for cross-view rows, and no third-party registry-level override), plus one subtlety the load-order seam carries: registrant plugins must declare `inject: ['conversation']` to sequence after the slot declaration, a convention the seam makes correct by construction but does not statically force on third parties.
The client has one registration model; auditing who renders tool rows = reading register calls, the same audit as every other slot. Registrants get the framework's error isolation, inject caching, and store seat for free — no capability ships twice. The costs are the accepted semantic changes above (chiefly: per-view registration for cross-view rows, and no third-party registry-level override). Independent registrants name the typed slot in `ctx.slots.inject`, so the dependency is explicit and follows declaration replacement without a service-order convention.