Skip to content

Conversation

@paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member

@paoloricciuti paoloricciuti commented Nov 21, 2025

Closes #17206

For some reason, despite a situation like this being the input for the second commit in #17163 we still ended up ignoring it.

This fixes it, however it introduces a new Map which I'm not too happy with...we could maybe do something with the batch itself?

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.
  • If this PR changes code within packages/svelte/src, add a changeset (npx changeset).

Tests and linting

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

@changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Nov 21, 2025

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: b769107

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

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Playground

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/svelte@17212

@sillvva
Copy link

sillvva commented Nov 21, 2025

@dummdidumm
Copy link
Member

This fails if you update and then read because there's no chance for batch_values to clear itself, example. Still, I'm somewhat inklined to merge because this is still better than what we have right now

@paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member Author

This fails if you update and then read because there's no chance for batch_values to clear itself, example. Still, I'm somewhat inklined to merge because this is still better than what we have right now

I feel like we should always update inside forks...we could technically do it, but would that be wasteful and possibly performance problematic?

@paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member Author

@dummdidumm last commit fixes your playground while keeping CI green (maybe we should also update the test to include the second write)...but I'm really not convinced it's the right solution...it feels wasteful (but more correct so maybe is fine?)

Copy link
Member

@dummdidumm dummdidumm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ah yeah that works - made it less expensive and updated the test. Thank you!

@dummdidumm dummdidumm merged commit ea8838e into main Nov 24, 2025
18 checks passed
@dummdidumm dummdidumm deleted the forked-derived-values branch November 24, 2025 21:41
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Nov 24, 2025
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.

[5.43.13] Hover preload error: props_invalid_value

4 participants