Updated Immutable Data Stuctures Docs #9845
Conversation
updated immutable data structures section
docs/docs/optimizing-performance.md
Outdated
| @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ const y = x.set('foo', 'baz'); | |||
| x === y; // false | |||
| ``` | |||
|
|
|||
| In this case, since a new reference is returned when mutating `x`, we can safely assume that `x` has changed. | |||
| In this case, since a new reference is returned when mutating `x`, we can safely assume that `x` has not changed. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see where the confusion is coming from, but I think this is also missing the point that's it's trying to communicate. When it says
we can safely assume that
xhas changed.
It means we know the value that x was holding, which was updated and stored in a new reference y, has changed because the reference equality check returned false.
We should clarify this point better. I suggest something like:
In this case, since a new reference is returned when mutating
xwe can use a reference equality check (x === y) to verify that the new value stored inyis different than the original value stored inx.
It might also be useful to demonstrate that updating a record with the same value results in a passing equality check:
const y = x.set('foo', 'bar')
x === y // trueThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the reply! I've implemented these changes in a new commit.
|
Great points! I think what we've got now is alot more clear. |
|
Looks great, thanks @kastentx! |
* updated immutable data structures section * improved immutable clarifications * changes to example immutable code (cherry picked from commit 8f4d307)
I corrected the issue I raised in issue #9844 in the Optimizing Performance > Using Immutable Data Structures of the documentation.
I also just submitted a CLA. Thanks!