API to remove me from parent

[krawaller]

During my plays with react-cursor I've often wished I could delete a cursor, removing it from its parent (if it has one). Or am I misunderstanding something in barking up this tree? Say for example we wanted to add a delete button to the Clicker components in the helloworld webapp example. Is there a better way to do that without my imaginary delete API?

[dustingetz]

Here is how I do it

var counts = cursor.refine('very', 'deeply', 'nested', 'counts'); counts.refine(0).onChange(42); // set the first counter to 42 counts.onChange(_.tail(counts.value)); // remove the first counter

I think in general to remove something from the collection you'll want to work with a cursor to the collection as a whole - because you want access to the entire collection API to remove/add/filter etc

[krawaller]

Ok, how about if I wanted to add a delete button to the JsonEditor and JsonLeafEditor classes of the JSON editor example? As per your suggestion I could do it by giving all components access to the full cursor, but that just seems so.. brutish and inelegant.

EDIT: I guess I could do it by giving all components their key and a cursor pointing to their parent. Still not as clean as a .delete call would be, but not too inelegant either.

[dustingetz]

giving all components their key and a cursor pointing to their parent

This is how I would do it.

I have not thought a delete() method through all the way yet and will think out loud: delete() will need to know the collection type. So if we limit cursors to only work with JSON types, we can teach delete() about maps and arrays. react-cursor isn't going to work too well with non-JSON types anyway since it relies on React.addons.update, so maybe that would be okay.

Note that if we finish https://github.com/dustingetz/react-cursor/issues/10, we would have access to splice directly from the cursor. I presume React.addons.update provides an immutable implementation of splice because the native javascript version mutates the target collection which is forbidden in react/cursors.

[krawaller]

Seems weird that React.addons.update doesn't have a $delete command for objects. Made a PR to add that.

More thinking out loud: A cursor could have a pointer to its parent (so we must hack refine to account for that). When .remove is called (remove is a better name for the method since it can then be map/array-agnostic), it calls splice or delete on the parent to remove the child.

A remove call should also make subsequent calls to any API method throw an error. As should calling remove on a non-refined cursor.

Hmm - maybe having all refined cursors carry a pointer to their parents is a can of worms?

[krawaller]

Hmm continued - since I might have a reference to a descendant elsewhere, when I remove a cursor, I must do a recursive dive into all children to throwify their API methods too.

EDIT: That won't work, as we won't get to eventual references that way. But if all cursors have access to their parents anyway, we can do a quick recursive check through parents to see if an ancestor has been deleted.

[krawaller]

And we must also decide what value a removed cursor should return. Or maybe trying to display a removed cursor is always an error? Ideally it should never happen, if the cursor is state in the top-level component.

[dustingetz]

Adding support to navigate back up the path wouldn't be a hack, real functional zippers support that. E.g. https://github.com/xsc/rewrite-clj

The argument against allowing react-cursor to navigate up, is that it breaks "encapsulation" (that word is loosely used as an analogy). One design goal is to be able to hand off a cursor to a react component, and be assured that the component's state is "boxed" to that cursor; it can't accidentally write to state somewhere else in the tree. So you can have a bunch of instances of a component, and each instance gets its own cursor, and you are guaranteed that all the instances have their own state and can't muck around with state that isn't theirs.

[krawaller]

I think that argument is a strong one. Spontaneously I say that although we internally keep a pointer to the parent in order to implement .remove, that should not be exposed to the user.

[krawaller]

Seems React are deprecating React.addons.update in favour of ImmutableJS.

[dustingetz]

Interesting, I don't know what to do about that, I guess we can keep an eye on it

[dustingetz]

Declined