-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(stop): implement store.stop() fn #76
Conversation
Ah yeah this is clever - now what I wonder is if this leaks memory (I think it does) edit: so what I'm saying is: if it does maybe we should find a different way? - should we care about memory being leaked? I think we should |
Yeah, I guess even as the previous app goes out of scope, all of the calls to send fns returned from My view is that given the current situation, which was for the entire app to continue running, we had a much bigger memory leak, so this keeps that leak from impacting performance in a huge way like it was. I'd like to find a way to fully kill the app with no leaks at all, but I also wanted to keep the scope of changes small in order to make it easier/faster to merge. I wonder if we could incorporate this as a first pass, and then open another issue to try fully plugging the leak? LMK 馃榿 |
Sorry to pester you @yoshuawuyts, but is there anything I can do to help move this along? I have a tiny patch waiting for Thank you! diff --git a/index.js b/index.js
index 7d27baf..8a758ba 100644
--- a/index.js
+++ b/index.js
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ function choo (opts) {
start.router = router
start.model = model
start.start = start
+ start.stop = _store.stop
start.use = use
return start |
|
Hey 馃憢 So I went ahead and whipped up an implementation for the
stop()
fn which I found wanting/needing for hot reload (#75). It was pretty simple to add. Let me know what you think.