Derived data in a store vs reconcile

Hey there, I'm trying to somehow have derived/computed data sit in a rather deeply nested store, ie values that depend on "real" values stored in the store. The docs suggests getters, and that works fine, until I try to use reconcile:

const [state, setState] = createStore({
    a: 5,
    b: 6,
    get c() { return state.a + state.b; }
});

setState(reconcile({ a: 7, b: 6 }));
console.log(state.c); //error, `c` got deleted

const [state, setState] = createStore({
    a: 5,
    b: 6,
    get c() { return state.a + state.b; }
});

setState(reconcile({ a: 7, b: 6 }));
console.log(state.c); //error, `c` got deleted

Our data is a particularly great fit for

reconcile

reconcile

, it'd be a shame to not be able to use that. In the end I found a workaround, which is to make a field

data

data

with the all the raw data in it (and reconcile that), and put the getters one level higher in the hierarchy. Is that the recommended approach? Or is there a different way to have

reconcile

reconcile

leave the setters be?

I noticed that with a class (returning

createMutable(this)

createMutable(this)

from the constructor) it actually works, ie I can put instances of that class in a store and reconcile on the fields, and the getters/methods aren't touched because they're on the prototype and not the instance. But I don't love it because, even though I really like classes/OO, I don't really love making them fully mutable for all the reasons Ryan likes to cite. I'd totally go for an immutable class, F#

with

with

style, but I've yet to find an elegant way to accomplish that with JS (let alone solid stores / reconcile).

Any ideas? Thanks!

SolidJS•3y ago•

6 replies

skrebbel

Derived data in a store vs reconcile

const [state, setState] = createStore({
    a: 5,
    b: 6,
    get c() { return state.a + state.b; }
});

setState(reconcile({ a: 7, b: 6 }));
console.log(state.c); //error, `c` got deleted

const [state, setState] = createStore({
    a: 5,
    b: 6,
    get c() { return state.a + state.b; }
});

setState(reconcile({ a: 7, b: 6 }));
console.log(state.c); //error, `c` got deleted

Our data is a particularly great fit for

reconcile

reconcile

, it'd be a shame to not be able to use that. In the end I found a workaround, which is to make a field

data

data

with the all the raw data in it (and reconcile that), and put the getters one level higher in the hierarchy. Is that the recommended approach? Or is there a different way to have

reconcile

reconcile

leave the setters be?

I noticed that with a class (returning

createMutable(this)

createMutable(this)

with

with

style, but I've yet to find an elegant way to accomplish that with JS (let alone solid stores / reconcile).

Any ideas? Thanks!

Derived data in a store vs reconcile

Similar Threads

Derived data in a store vs reconcile

Similar Threads

Similar Threads

Similar Threads