Add extensions support for CompositionConditionalValue

[arcadiogarcia]

Fixes

Currently the toolkit has helpers for creating expression animations for InteractionTrackerInertiaRestingValue, InteractionTrackerInertiaMotion... but there are no equivalent extension methods for working with the similar CompositionConditionalValue (which is used to configure CenterPoint modifiers for InteractionTrackers/VisualInteractionSources). This PR adds the same extension methods that already exist for the former types to the latter.

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Feature

What is the current behavior?

There are no extension methods for working with CompositionConditionalValue

What is the new behavior?

The same extensions that are available for other modifiers are now available for CompositionConditionalValue

PR Checklis

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• Tested code with current supported SDKs
• Pull Request has been submitted to the documentation repository instructions. Link: https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/WindowsCommunityToolkitDocs/pull/410/files
• N/A Sample in sample app has been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
  • N/A Icon has been created (if new sample) following the Thumbnail Style Guide and templates
• N/A Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features) (if applicable)
• N/A Header has been added to all new source files (run build/UpdateHeaders.bat)
• Contains NO breaking changes

Other information

[ghost]

Thanks arcadiogarcia for opening a Pull Request! The reviewers will test the PR and highlight if there is any conflict or changes required. If the PR is approved we will proceed to merge the pull request 🙌

[michael-hawker]

Thanks @arcadiogarcia, seems straight-forward enough. I haven't explored this API set much in the toolkit. Mind if I pick your brain a bit?

I don't think there's any unit tests for this API. Is this something you think we could try and test to some degree? Any thoughts?

We're also working towards trying to tease out the dependencies on Behaviors and Win2D which are both tied to this package. As a consumer of this package, any thoughts on how we might split some of these bits apart to other parts of the Toolkit?

Thanks!

[ghost]

Hello @michael-hawker!

Because this pull request has the auto merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.

p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.

[arcadiogarcia]

@michael-hawker Testing that the animation works as expected might be tricky, but I think having a few unit tests for CreateExpressionAnimationFromNode would be a great idea, if only to make sure we exercise all the operators and catch regressions in the ones that are used less often (like the recent bug affecting !).

I don't think i have any strong opinions regarding how the packages are split because I personally rarely only use this package, I usually need the whole Controls package (and automatically get Animations as a dependency, otherwise I'd reference it separately).