feat(core): implement onWatch
#165
Conversation
mhevery
force-pushed
the
pr-on-watch
branch
3 times, most recently
from
fca71ed to
a75b709
Compare
| @@ -129,6 +129,11 @@ export interface JSXNode<T = any> { | |||
| // @public | |||
| export function notifyRender(hostElement: Element): Promise<void>; | |||
|
|
|||
| // @public | |||
| export interface Observer { | |||
| <T extends {}>(obj: T): T; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it would be interesting to make this more strongly typed, can we observe any kind of objects? I have an idea of how to achieve this, we can develop on a call.
anyway, good to merge for now!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, let's get a discussion going.
| @@ -165,6 +170,12 @@ export const onUnmount$: (first: () => void) => void; | |||
| // @public | |||
| export function onUnmount(unmountFn: QRL<() => void>): void; | |||
|
|
|||
| // @public | |||
| export const onWatch$: (first: (obs: Observer) => unknown | (() => void)) => void; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if we can return a promise, then we should use ValueOrPromise
| export const onWatch$: (first: (obs: Observer) => unknown | (() => void)) => void; | |
| export const onWatch$: (first: (obs: Observer) => ValueOrPromise<unknown | (() => void)) => void>; | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we should allow a promise here. Because the whole point of the return function is to have a cleanup in case we have to call it again. If it is a promise then the cleanup function may show up way too late.
️✅ There are no secrets present in this pull request anymore.If these secrets were true positive and are still valid, we highly recommend you to revoke them. |
Closes #63