Implement spread binding

[sxxov]

Rendered.

[Florian-Schoenherr]

really extensive 😄
I think the ... solution is pretty neat.

[RiseNet-Web]

really extensive smile
I think the ... solution is pretty neat.

Same

[manvankaliber]

I would love to see this implemented.

[ghost]

I like the idea, but I think a bind={object} syntax would be more terse.

[0x6563]

Because the spread operator already exists for passing attributes, it seems tempting to use similar syntax for binding and even event handling. But I feel that semantically it doesn't really make sense.

To give you an example where I am coming from, a common practice when you use destructuring assignment in JS you do so to create a new object with a new reference, to prevent mutation on the source object.

ie: { url: 'foo.bar', headers: {...headers, authorization: 'API TOKEN' } }.

As much I like your suggestion of bind:{...object} which is easy to interpret at first glance. I think a good alternative maybe to use * as a wildcard.
ie:
bind:*={object}
on:*={object}
*={object}

Some Pros:

• * is common enough as a wildcard
• Wont require introducing any new syntax or logic at the parser level See: Ref
• Can be handled in the Binding and EventHandler classes similar to how Attributes works.

[simonhvc]

This would be a nice feature to have. It helps us create more dynamic components and wrappers. Any updates on this?

[st3v3y]

Any updates on this? It would be definitely a nice feature to have.

[mark-russ]

I hit a snag where I could really make use of this feature.