Solve memoize problems in withColors #6736
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The current implementation. contained a memory leak (in the direct usage of [] in get). Besides that we were keeping references to setAttributes of a component even when the component was removed. Lodash memoize has also replaced with memize.
jorgefilipecosta
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The current implementation contains a memory leak (direct usage of [] in get). Besides that, we were keeping references to old setAttributes of a component even when the component was removed. Props to @aduth for noticing these problems.
Lodash memoize has also replaced with memize.
This solution is complex and it seems the best long-term solution is changing the API. I have plans to change it and simplify its logic, but even changing it, we will support this version for 2 versions (before we can deprecate it) so I feel like we should solve the current problems the code contains even if the current solution is not the final one.
Another option is just reverting #6686 but that would bring back the rerender problem.