Allow inline actor logic

[davidkpiano]

No description provided.

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 610b25e

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package

Name	Type
xstate	Minor

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[codesandbox-ci]

This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox.

To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA.

[Andarist]

The problem is that by allowing inline actor logics you allow them to override the ones that are configured and that leads to problems:

const m = setup({
  types: { children: { foo: 'myChild' } },
  actors: {
    myChild: fromPromise(async () => "")
  }
}).createMachine({
  entry: spawnChild(fromPromise(async () => 100), { id: 'foo' })
})

const actorRef = createActor(m)
const val = actorRef.getSnapshot().children.foo.getSnapshot().output // actual: number | undefined, expected: string | undefined

[davidkpiano]

The problem is that by allowing inline actor logics you allow them to override the ones that are configured and that leads to problems:

const m = setup({
  types: { children: { foo: 'myChild' } },
  actors: {
    myChild: fromPromise(async () => "")
  }
}).createMachine({
  entry: spawnChild(fromPromise(async () => 100), { id: 'foo' })
})

const actorRef = createActor(m)
const val = actorRef.getSnapshot().children.foo.getSnapshot().output // actual: number | undefined, expected: string | undefined

This really makes me think that the way that child actors are defined is a bit awkward currently. Would love to revisit this for v6