Are Record types a bad type for using stores in Solid?
I posted this on github, its got the examples there. Essentially what I am trying to figure out is if using a
Record<string, muhType> data type is the wrong choice for stores.
I noticed that when I add a record, Solidjs issues updates where needed. The second you delete a record, it fails to both issue updates and actually remove the record.
https://github.com/solidjs/solid/discussions/2150GitHub
Object property in store is reactive when adding but not when remov...
When I create a new store I can add properties to a nested object and the app is reactive to those changes. Things work as expected so far. However, when I start to delete or remove properties, eve...
4 Replies
Did you try:
Set values tohttps://www.solidjs.com/docs/latest/api#updating-storesundefinedto delete them from the Store. In TypeScript, you can delete a value by using a non-null assertion, likeundefined!.
SolidJS
Solid is a purely reactive library. It was designed from the ground up with a reactive core. It's influenced by reactive principles developed by previous libraries.
I did not. I missed this part. They don't show an example in the example code.
I just tested this and I can confirm that it does work. Thank you.
fun fact
changing
to
works too
But then for
<Index> to properly update, you have to have
instead of
Because compiler doesn't recognize this (the onRemove return value) as reactive function and you give it (onRemove) only initial value of state()This looks like a good place for Solid's alternative call syntax: