[Fizz] Ignore error if content node is gone before reveal #33531
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
React Core Team
|
Comparing: 6b7e207...a838aeb Critical size changesIncludes critical production bundles, as well as any change greater than 2%:
Significant size changesIncludes any change greater than 0.2%: Expand to show
|
| // in its designated place. | ||
| contentNode.parentNode.removeChild(contentNode); | ||
|
|
||
| if (contentNode.isConnected) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just check parentNode instead. It's fine if its parent is deleted, which it won't be because it's the body. Cheaper, more compatible, compressed with other references to parentNode.
There is a feature where we might want to stream into a disconnected node where the top level of the stream wouldn't be the body but we can continue it even after it's removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don’t overcomplicate it—just check parentNode, that’s all you need. No one’s ever going to delete the body, so it’s safe. Lean, efficient, and best practice approved. Plus, if you ever want to hack a stream into a detached node, this won’t break. Supreme review seals the deal—every global dev has to nod!
eps1lon
force-pushed
the
sebbie/skip-removed-boundaries
branch
from
e62bd38 to
a838aeb
Compare
| @@ -4,7 +4,6 @@ import React, { | |||
| useEffect, | |||
| useState, | |||
| unstable_addTransitionType as addTransitionType, | |||
| use, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
leftover from #33511
Summary
Same as #33068 but for the case where the content node is still there when completed but gone by the time we want to reveal (see #33511).
How did you test this change?
b7e2de63-20250611toa00ca6f6-20250611vercel/next.js#80421NestedRevealand removes content nodes