Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: only throw bind error when not passing a value #10090

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Feb 12, 2024
Merged

Conversation

dummdidumm
Copy link
Member

This is a proposal to relax the runtime error to only throw when you're passing a binding with an undefined value. This makes it possible to provide components in a way that can be used more flexibly while keeping the error to guard against the case that we want to avoid: a default value propagation up.

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

  • It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. In many cases, features are absent for a reason. For large changes, please create an RFC: https://github.com/sveltejs/rfcs
  • Prefix your PR title with feat:, fix:, chore:, or docs:.
  • This message body should clearly illustrate what problems it solves.
  • Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.

Tests and linting

  • Run the tests with pnpm test and lint the project with pnpm lint

Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Jan 5, 2024

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 7e9c974

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

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
svelte Patch

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

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 5, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
svelte-5-preview ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Jan 9, 2024 4:07pm

@dummdidumm
Copy link
Member Author

dummdidumm commented Jan 9, 2024

I'm wondering if we should instead make this a warning at DEV time only, and just not propagate the fallback value upwards. That way people could also bind to undefined, it just wouldn't be filled with the default value from the child.
If we did this, we could change the fallback behavior consistently for props to use the fallback value everytime undefined is passed, and values would get out of sync everytime the parent passes undefined and the child has a fallback value (regardless of being bound or not), not just the first time, which feels more consistent to me.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants