Object.defineProperty should trigger reactions

[robbiewxyz]

Setting a new value or a new get function using Object.defineProperty should trigger reactions on the relevant key. This should support reacting to both modifying existing keys of and adding new keys to an object.

This would require adding a new Proxy trap and writing tests for the new behavior.

I'm willing and able to help put together a pull request.

Any thoughts?

[solkimicreb]

I am not sure about that. There are a few get and set like operations that are not covered by design: https://itnext.io/the-ideas-behind-react-easy-state-901d70e4d03e. Object.defineProperty is one of them. I think it is too meta level, we can revise this though.

Did you get into a use case where this behavior surprised you or did you make this suggestion based on the source code?

[robbiewxyz]

I just skimmed over your blog post and read the section you mentioned (A Bit of Intuition). Here's my use case: I'm using observer-util for a dynamic & reactive table of data and expressions, similar to a spreadsheet. Data is stored as a property assignment with expressions stored by defining a getter. const spreadsheet = observable ({}) // both would trigger reactions properly spreadsheet.A1 = 1000 spreadsheet.B1 = 2000 // redefinition fails to trigger a reaction on B1 Object.defineProperty (spreadsheet, `B1`, { get: () => spreadsheet.A1 + 500 }) For my use case, dynamic getters have a huge advantage that APIs using the spreadsheet object don't have to care whether they're accessing a data "cell" or an expression "cell". I like what you're doing with this project by extending plain and intuitive JavaScript with reactivity. While I may be missing a good reason not to make the Object.defineProperty operation reactive, I do think allowing dynamic getters would make observer-util even better.

…

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020, 02:32 Miklos Bertalan ***@***.***> wrote: I am not sure about that. There are a few get and set like operations that are not covered by design: https://itnext.io/the-ideas-behind-react-easy-state-901d70e4d03e. Object.defineProperty is one of them. I think it is too meta level, we can revise this though. Did you get into a use case where this behavior surprised you or did you make this suggestion based on the source code? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#44?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABXYF3QQN7NLHMXU5O4XLSDRGC7LPA5CNFSM4IY5CEQKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEOAWJZY#issuecomment-595682535>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABXYF3R5WGUUJ75JNJJ5NE3RGC7LPANCNFSM4IY5CEQA> .

[robbiewxyz]

Additionally, I'd point out that your plainObject = raw (observableProxy) accessor API can cover for circumstances where it's desirable to use Object.defineProperty (or any other operation) in a non-reactive manner. Fwiw, let me know what you think.

…

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020, 09:39 Robbie W ***@***.***> wrote: I just skimmed over your blog post and read the section you mentioned (A Bit of Intuition). Here's my use case: I'm using observer-util for a dynamic & reactive table of data and expressions, similar to a spreadsheet. Data is stored as a property assignment with expressions stored by defining a getter. const spreadsheet = observable ({}) // both would trigger reactions properly spreadsheet.A1 = 1000 spreadsheet.B1 = 2000 // redefinition fails to trigger a reaction on B1 Object.defineProperty (spreadsheet, `B1`, { get: () => spreadsheet.A1 + 500 }) For my use case, dynamic getters have a huge advantage that APIs using the spreadsheet object don't have to care whether they're accessing a data "cell" or an expression "cell". I like what you're doing with this project by extending plain and intuitive JavaScript with reactivity. While I may be missing a good reason not to make the Object.defineProperty operation reactive, I do think allowing dynamic getters would make observer-util even better. On Fri, Mar 6, 2020, 02:32 Miklos Bertalan ***@***.***> wrote: > I am not sure about that. There are a few get and set like operations > that are not covered by design: > https://itnext.io/the-ideas-behind-react-easy-state-901d70e4d03e. > Object.defineProperty is one of them. I think it is too meta level, we > can revise this though. > > Did you get into a use case where this behavior surprised you or did you > make this suggestion based on the source code? > > — > You are receiving this because you authored the thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#44?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABXYF3QQN7NLHMXU5O4XLSDRGC7LPA5CNFSM4IY5CEQKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEOAWJZY#issuecomment-595682535>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABXYF3R5WGUUJ75JNJJ5NE3RGC7LPANCNFSM4IY5CEQA> > . >