feat(View): add prevent_update param

[TrapDrap]

Summary

Adding prevent_update to View. Option preventing storing permanent views for separate messages by default.
(since there's no limit to how many different buttons get stored, and if not stopped properly can cause issues over time when running a bot for long periods without reboot, and users are not notified of these being stored)

Checklist

• If code changes were made then they have been tested.
  • I have updated the documentation to reflect the changes.
  • I have run task pyright and fixed the relevant issues.
• This PR fixes an issue.
• This PR adds something new (e.g. new method or parameters).
• This PR is a breaking change (e.g. methods or parameters removed/renamed)
• This PR is not a code change (e.g. documentation, README, ...)

[EmreTech]

If the auto_stop parameter limits storing persistent views for specific messages, force_global or just global would be a better name.

[EmreTech]

Also, to avoid breaking changes, the default for auto_stop or whatever the parameter will end up being named should be False.

[TrapDrap]

If the auto_stop parameter limits storing persistent views for specific messages, force_global or just global would be a better name.

I'm thinking something like use_persistent or persistent could also work.

[EmreTech]

If the auto_stop parameter limits storing persistent views for specific messages, force_global or just global would be a better name.

I'm thinking something like use_persistent or persistent could also work.

That doesn't make sense imo. The whole point of this PR is to limit storing persistent views with a specific message, right?

[TrapDrap]

Also, to avoid breaking changes, the default for auto_stop or whatever the parameter will end up being named should be False.

Well, the main part of this is to fix the issue of views being stored without the user's knowledge, since most people probably call their views without knowing they need to properly stop it, it being set to True makes sense. Will wait on more input tho.

[EmreTech]

Well, the main part of this is to fix the issue of views being stored without the user's knowledge

Can you elaborate how this happens? Also, wouldn't more precise docs be better instead of this breaking change?

[TrapDrap]

Well, the main part of this is to fix the issue of views being stored without the user's knowledge

Can you elaborate how this happens? Also, wouldn't more precise docs be better instead of this breaking change?

On every message sent with a view, all components are added to a list specific to that message. Over time, these are not deleted, even when the messages are uncached, accumulating in the background. It's a very rare scenario you would need to use message-specific data if you're using a persistent view, usually, you get all the message data from interaction.message, so it wouldn't be a noticeable breaking change to the large majority of View users.
Message-specific view also causes updated views not to reflect on older messages, this fixes that.

[EmreTech]

Well, the main part of this is to fix the issue of views being stored without the user's knowledge

Can you elaborate how this happens? Also, wouldn't more precise docs be better instead of this breaking change?

On every message sent with a view, all components are added to a list specific to that message. Over time, these are not deleted, even when the messages are uncached, accumulating in the background. It's a very rare scenario you would need to use message-specific data if you're using a persistent view, usually, you get all the message data from interaction.message, so it wouldn't be a noticeable breaking change to the large majority of View users.

Ah I understand now.

[TrapDrap]

that's really weird, changing the var and it's suddenly failing

[TrapDrap]

nevermind it's just a the python global, guess cant use "global" as name

[EmreTech]

Ignore my last comment, I confused the global keyword with globals.

[TrapDrap]

hold on i used the wrong version 💀

[TrapDrap]

I changed the name to prevent_update to match with the already existing ...prevent_update... function when setting the message-specific view

[spifory]

Also correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this exactly fixes an issue; And also this is not a breaking change since you're just adding a parameter.

[TrapDrap]

Also correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this exactly fixes an issue; And also this is not a breaking change since you're just adding a parameter.

Ah yes, some of those checks are outdated. It use to be a breaking change & fixes an issue but now is an optional param.

[TrapDrap]

I have no idea why there's a conflict.

[TrapDrap]

Reopen, still adding back changes