You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Because Arbor nodes are proxies around data and even though for instances of Arbor, the underlying data is mutable the proxies wrapping nodes in the OST (observable state tree) get "refreshed" every time the underlying data is mutated. This is done so that we can easily compute diffs on the OST, by simply comparing the identity of nodes, e.g. ===.
However, this behavior can create some unexpected behavior. For instance, take the following store holding an array of todos:
Then the identity of the variable todo1 will no longer be the same as store.state[0] since that node in the OST will be refreshed to indicate it has been mutated, so the following will be false:
todo1===store.state[0]=>false
Similarly, Array#includes would return unexpected results, for example:
store.state.includes(todo1)=>false
Even though todo1 points to something valid within the OST.
I believe we can provide a better DX if we extend Array#includes as part of the overwrites in ArrayNodeHandler so that it automatically compares the Seed value of the values being compared, this would enabled users to rely on Array#includes for this type of check.
Because Arbor nodes are proxies around data and even though for instances of
Arbor
, the underlying data is mutable the proxies wrapping nodes in the OST (observable state tree) get "refreshed" every time the underlying data is mutated. This is done so that we can easily compute diffs on the OST, by simply comparing the identity of nodes, e.g.===
.However, this behavior can create some unexpected behavior. For instance, take the following store holding an array of todos:
Should we get a reference of say,
todo 1
and mutate it like so:Then the identity of the variable
todo1
will no longer be the same asstore.state[0]
since that node in the OST will be refreshed to indicate it has been mutated, so the following will be false:Similarly,
Array#includes
would return unexpected results, for example:Even though
todo1
points to something valid within the OST.I believe we can provide a better DX if we extend
Array#includes
as part of the overwrites inArrayNodeHandler
so that it automatically compares theSeed
value of the values being compared, this would enabled users to rely onArray#includes
for this type of check.Prototype
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: