chore: improve derived ownership model #13623
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 1ad80f2 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
trueadm
commented
Oct 16, 2024
| @@ -488,7 +488,7 @@ describe('signals', () => { | |||
| assert.equal(a?.deps?.length, 1); | |||
| assert.equal(s?.reactions?.length, 1); | |||
| destroy(); | |||
| assert.equal(a?.deps, null); | |||
| assert.equal(a?.deps?.length, 1); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The derived still gets GC'd so this check isn't all that important. I think it's best to remove this line.
Rich-Harris
approved these changes
Oct 16, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#13563 introduced owned deriveds, but it turns out that eagerly attaching each derived to its parent effect upon creation wasn't ideal. Instead, we can lazily do it upon encountering a read on a derived in a context where there is no active reaction. I can't believe I didn't think of this sooner!
Before:
After:
