Deleting object properties doesn't update the UI since 0.3.1

Do you want to request a feature or report a bug?

Bug

What is the current behavior?

If you have an object within a document, then deleting keys from that object doesn’t update the firestore.data variable, however firestore.ordered is updated. This means the if the component uses firestore.data then the UI is not updated to reflect deleted keys. The database is correctly updated and refreshing the browser shows the expected values.

See https://codesandbox.io/s/m3jm3roko8 for an example.

In both 0.3.1 and <0.3.1 I can add an item and have it appear in the UI. The Redux diff looks like this for 0.3.1

and like this for 0.2.8

However when deleting items, 0.3.1 has this diff:

and 0.2.8 has this diff

Note that 0.3.1 only deletes the ordered value, but leaves the data value intact while 0.2.8 correctly deletes its data value and doesn’t set an ordered value.

What is the expected behavior?

Values in firestore.data are updated to reflect the database value when object properties are deleted. This occurs as expected prior to 0.3.1.

Which versions of dependencies, and which browser are affected by this issue? Did this work in previous versions or setups?

See code sandbox

Steps to reproduce and if possible a minimal demo of the problem via codesandbox or similar.

https://codesandbox.io/s/m3jm3roko8

Hit the add and delete buttons. Notice that items are added correctly, but not removed when they are deleted. Hit refresh and the deleted items will go away.

It’s a bit fiddly, but you can remove the redux-firestore dep and change it to 0.2.8 then refresh to try with the working version, although it sometimes takes a few tries to change the version.

The database looks like this if you want to create your own.

❤️

[will-hart]

OK, I ran

yarn add https://github.com/prescottprue/redux-firestore.git#c7af296d1f9c503609a01b5eb5950bd2394cffd9

and then npm run build in the redux-firestore folder. This commit resolves the issue for me.

[prescottprue]

@will-hart Using assign before made things work for this case, but it seemed to be part of what was causing #49 (hence the change to merge).

I was also planning on having an option of whether or not to merge similar to the mergeOrdered option that was just added.

Either way, going to revert the usage of merge over assign. I’m going to add a test case that covers what you are describing before attempting other fixes for the merging issues.