svelte
svelte copied to clipboard
sveltejs
Svelte 5: Put `unstate` on `$state` rune?
Describe the problem
Since unstate is linked to $state, it might make sense to make it a function on $state.
unstate is also a bit of an odd/non-word.
Describe the proposed solution
Not sure about the name, maybe one of
$state.remove / $state.removed
$state.clear / $state.cleared
$state.off
Importance
nice to have
putting this on the milestone in the sense of "we need to decide whether or not we want to do this until 5.0"
We decided to keep untrack as a function, given how rare its usage is (and should be).
Oops sorry - reopening . We haven't decided that one yet, though it may go in the same direction
I don't think we need a new rune for this right now. We can always leave it for now make it one later, but doing the reverse it going to be much harder.
I think the main thing that would appeal to me about making this a rune would be the possibility of doing this without wrapping the expression in a function. E.g., we could have $untrack(foo) instead of untrack(() => foo).
@Conduitry This is for unstate though, which doesn't suffer from that problem.
Considering how unstate has been confused with untrack twice here in the same thread, both by major contributers (which is a great example of the oddness of unstate), I think that at least a rename should be considered. I think remove more clearly represents what unstate does ($state.remove(), removeState(), etc.), and I think the word ignore better represents what untrack does ($ignore(), $state.ignore(), ignoreState()).
I also like $state.less() as a possibility since it's shorter and clever.
I was thinking the word removed might better indicate how the function is non-destructive (like toSpliced), however, that might lead developers to expect a clone when they might not get one, i.e. if a non-reactive object is passed.
We decided that the confusion over the naming of this function warranted it being a new rune after all.
