Fix mutation hooks types #11024
Fix mutation hooks types #11024
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR modifies the type definitions for mutation hooks (useUpdate, useUpdateMany, useCreate, useDelete, useDeleteMany) by removing the Omit<UseMutationOptions, 'mutationFn'> wrapper, allowing mutationFn to be included in the options type.
Key changes:
- Type definitions now directly use
UseMutationOptionsinstead of omittingmutationFn - Applies consistently across all five mutation hooks
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| packages/ra-core/src/dataProvider/useUpdateMany.ts | Removed Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> wrapper from UseUpdateManyOptions type definition |
| packages/ra-core/src/dataProvider/useUpdate.ts | Removed Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> wrapper from UseUpdateOptions type definition |
| packages/ra-core/src/dataProvider/useDeleteMany.ts | Removed Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> wrapper from UseDeleteManyOptions type definition |
| packages/ra-core/src/dataProvider/useDelete.ts | Removed Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> wrapper from UseDeleteOptions type definition |
| packages/ra-core/src/dataProvider/useCreate.ts | Removed Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> wrapper from UseCreateOptions type definition |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
| > = UseMutationOptions< | ||
| RecordType, | ||
| ErrorType, | ||
| Partial<UseUpdateMutateParams<RecordType>> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Allowing mutationFn in the options type creates an inconsistent API. The type now accepts mutationFn, but the runtime implementation (line 113) will silently override any user-provided value since it's defined after ...mutationOptions is spread (line 110). This mismatch between the type system and runtime behavior could confuse API consumers. Consider either: (1) keeping the Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> to prevent users from passing it, or (2) restructuring the code to respect a user-provided mutationFn if that's the intended behavior.
| > = UseMutationOptions< | |
| RecordType, | |
| ErrorType, | |
| Partial<UseUpdateMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| > = Omit< | |
| UseMutationOptions< | |
| RecordType, | |
| ErrorType, | |
| Partial<UseUpdateMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| >, | |
| 'mutationFn' |
| > = UseMutationOptions< | ||
| Array<RecordType['id']>, | ||
| MutationError, | ||
| Partial<UseUpdateManyMutateParams<RecordType>> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Allowing mutationFn in the options type creates an inconsistent API. The type now accepts mutationFn, but the runtime implementation (line 109) will silently override any user-provided value since it's defined after ...mutationOptions is spread (line 106). This mismatch between the type system and runtime behavior could confuse API consumers. Consider either: (1) keeping the Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> to prevent users from passing it, or (2) restructuring the code to respect a user-provided mutationFn if that's the intended behavior.
| > = UseMutationOptions< | |
| Array<RecordType['id']>, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseUpdateManyMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| > = Omit< | |
| UseMutationOptions< | |
| Array<RecordType['id']>, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseUpdateManyMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| >, | |
| 'mutationFn' |
| > = UseMutationOptions< | ||
| RecordType, | ||
| MutationError, | ||
| Partial<UseDeleteMutateParams<RecordType>> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Allowing mutationFn in the options type creates an inconsistent API. The type now accepts mutationFn, but the runtime implementation will silently override any user-provided value since it's defined after ...mutationOptions is spread. This mismatch between the type system and runtime behavior could confuse API consumers. Consider either: (1) keeping the Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> to prevent users from passing it, or (2) restructuring the code to respect a user-provided mutationFn if that's the intended behavior.
| > = UseMutationOptions< | |
| RecordType, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseDeleteMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| > = Omit< | |
| UseMutationOptions< | |
| RecordType, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseDeleteMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| >, | |
| 'mutationFn' |
| > = UseMutationOptions< | ||
| Array<RecordType['id']> | undefined, | ||
| MutationError, | ||
| Partial<UseDeleteManyMutateParams<RecordType>> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Allowing mutationFn in the options type creates an inconsistent API. The type now accepts mutationFn, but the runtime implementation will silently override any user-provided value since it's defined after ...mutationOptions is spread. This mismatch between the type system and runtime behavior could confuse API consumers. Consider either: (1) keeping the Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> to prevent users from passing it, or (2) restructuring the code to respect a user-provided mutationFn if that's the intended behavior.
| > = UseMutationOptions< | |
| Array<RecordType['id']> | undefined, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseDeleteManyMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| > = Omit< | |
| UseMutationOptions< | |
| Array<RecordType['id']> | undefined, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseDeleteManyMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| >, | |
| 'mutationFn' |
| > = UseMutationOptions< | ||
| ResultRecordType, | ||
| MutationError, | ||
| Partial<UseCreateMutateParams<RecordType>> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Allowing mutationFn in the options type creates an inconsistent API. The type now accepts mutationFn, but the runtime implementation (line 116) will silently override any user-provided value since it's defined after ...mutationOptions is spread (line 113). This mismatch between the type system and runtime behavior could confuse API consumers. Consider either: (1) keeping the Omit<..., 'mutationFn'> to prevent users from passing it, or (2) restructuring the code to respect a user-provided mutationFn if that's the intended behavior.
| > = UseMutationOptions< | |
| ResultRecordType, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseCreateMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| > = Omit< | |
| UseMutationOptions< | |
| ResultRecordType, | |
| MutationError, | |
| Partial<UseCreateMutateParams<RecordType>> | |
| >, | |
| 'mutationFn' |
Problem
Our mutation hooks explicitly exclude the
mutationFnoption.However, we might want to override it to simplify hooks that reuse everything from a core mutation hook except the actual dataProvider call (ex:
useSoftDeletecould just pass a custom mutationFn touseDelete).Besides, the
mutationFnis optional in TanStack query so it won’t change anything for our users.Solution
Update the mutation hook to remove the explicit exclusion.