fix: #10435 update the observer dep to support a Set based implementation #12087
Conversation
There already exists another pull request for this same issue, specifically #8157, however it appears as though that pull request never progressed. The approach in this PR is different in its implementation in that it is Set based, which is in line with Vue 3.x |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (check at least one)
This PR introduces a performance improvement for component destruction.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (check one)
If yes, please describe the impact and migration path for existing applications:
The PR fulfills these requirements:
dev
branch for v2.x (or to a previous version branch), not themaster
branchfix #xxx[,#xxx]
, where "xxx" is the issue number)If adding a new feature, the PR's description includes:
Other information:
The issue that this PR aims to fix documents the observed performance issue and explains it pretty well.
At this moment in time upgrading to Vue 3 is not currently an option for me, getting some resolution to this issue would be awesome, hence the PR.
The PR aims to maintain compatibility with ES5 based browsers, but where Set is supported then it would favour that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: