Implement direct mutation support?

Posted this initially to #10 but it’s offtopic over the so I’m pulling it here.

Have you considered supporting mutating the state too? I think this method could be used to implement very mobx like api for Redux.

Eg. add support for this:

function Counter() {
	const state = useReduxState();
	return <button onClick={() => state.count++}>{count}</button>;
}

The implementation could go like this:

1. User does state.foo.bar = 1 in a event handler
   • it should be banned during the render tick
2. Record that change as a immer patch {"op": "replace", "path": ["foo", "bar"], "value": 1}
3. Create redux action from like

{
  type: "IMMER_PATCH",
  patch:  {"op": "replace", "path": ["foo", "bar"], "value": 1},
}

1. And apply it using applyPatches from immer in a reducer. It would support all the redux goodies: Devtools, Time-travel, action serialization etc.

Kinda getting excited about this 😃

[theKashey]

Do you know the limitations of this? I’ve read about the limitations of the spread operator in the tracking part but I can’t think of any problem in the mutation part.

https://github.com/theKashey/memoize-state/issues/26 - the only limitation so far. We likely have a solution for spreads.

[theKashey]

immer is working like a magic. But

Have you considered supporting mutating the state too?

This is something every new comer want, this is something every author of a brand new state management library want to introduce.

This is something I dont like to have. Idea is to separate actions and changes. To move side effects to sagas, to respond to one action from multiple reducers, to have easy way to debug and easy way to reason about.

Something like teaming Redux and useReducer - might be cool, but also catastrophic.

---

From another point of view - yes, this could be done.