Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
This fixes #17243 by only removing dependent keys in `teardown`. Since #16978 coalesces the work to add dependent keys to happen at most once, it is now incorrect to eagerly remove them in `didUnwatch` because that could happen for a variety of reasons while there are still other interested parties (see attached test cases). This limits the work of removing dependent keys to `teardown` only. The logic is that, while we want to defer setting up the "link" to the target property as lazily as possible, it is less important to "unlink" it eagerly once the work is done. It _may_ be possible to accomplish this, but the current amount of book-keeping is not sufficient to track the count properly. In our tests, we have created sequences like this: 1. setup (peekWatching = 0, so nothing happens) 2. get (consumed here) 3. willWatch (already consumed, no-op) 4. get (already consumed, no-op) 5. didUnwatch 6. ... In this case, it would be incorrect to "unlink" at step 5. As of PR #16978, `CONSUMED` is essentially a boolean flag, so it is not sufficient to track the balance, and also, there is no counterpart to `get`, which makes eager "unlinking" impossible without much more book-keeping. It's unclear that it would be worthwhile to do that. On the other hand, if we only "unlink" on teardown, this ensures that we are only "unlinking" at most once, and it is guaranteed that there are no longer any interested parties. Fixes #17243
- Loading branch information