Skip to content

chore: emit await_reactivity_loss in for await loops #16521

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Aug 6, 2025

Conversation

Ocean-OS
Copy link
Member

Currently, await expressions not inside an async derived are wrapped in track_reactivity_loss in dev to warn of a reactivity loss.
However, for await loops are not. This PR fixes that.

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

  • It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. In many cases, features are absent for a reason. For large changes, please create an RFC: https://github.com/sveltejs/rfcs
  • Prefix your PR title with feat:, fix:, chore:, or docs:.
  • This message body should clearly illustrate what problems it solves.
  • Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.
  • If this PR changes code within packages/svelte/src, add a changeset (npx changeset).

Tests and linting

  • Run the tests with pnpm test and lint the project with pnpm lint

Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Jul 29, 2025

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 88ba8e4

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
svelte Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

Copy link
Contributor

Playground

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/svelte@16521

@svelte-docs-bot
Copy link

Copy link
Member

@Rich-Harris Rich-Harris left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Clever solution, I like this much more than convoluted code transformations. I guess we need to decide whether we separately want to handle for await at the top level of components. Seems like a footgun but maybe there's a case where it would be useful? At the moment it won't compile (which is better than compiling but with broken reactivity)

@Rich-Harris Rich-Harris merged commit b181c45 into main Aug 6, 2025
15 checks passed
@Rich-Harris Rich-Harris deleted the track-reactivity-loss-for-await branch August 6, 2025 01:44
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Aug 6, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants