Skip to content

feat!: add a reactive engine (#5066)#5067

Open
DanySK wants to merge 18 commits intomasterfrom
feat/reactive-engine
Open

feat!: add a reactive engine (#5066)#5067
DanySK wants to merge 18 commits intomasterfrom
feat/reactive-engine

Conversation

@DanySK
Copy link
Member

@DanySK DanySK commented Jan 19, 2026

No description provided.

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jan 19, 2026

Hi @DanySK! 👋
This pull request has conflicts 😖
Could you fix it? 🔧
Thank you! 🙏

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 19, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 61.53%. Comparing base (004bdb5) to head (f77f6ed).
⚠️ Report is 158 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #5067   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     61.53%   61.53%           
  Complexity       14       14           
=========================================
  Files             2        2           
  Lines            78       78           
  Branches          4        4           
=========================================
  Hits             48       48           
  Misses           24       24           
  Partials          6        6           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

S-furi and others added 17 commits January 26, 2026 08:40
…l callback

Now the "laziness" concept is applied to dervied observables too.
For actions in general, it is better to use an imperative approach and retrieve the current neighborhood instead of having an up-to-date neighborhood version stored locally.
…ency graph

fix: remove obsolete reactive engine loading
chore(engine): use explicit synchronisation instead of thread contexts
This idea is borrowed by Androidx, where by means of Lifecycle state machines we are able to bound the lifecycle of the dependencies to the lifecycle of the owner (i.e. the registrant), properly disposing and releasing observers references withtout using weak references, hence not impacting too much negatively performance.
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

@DanySK
Copy link
Member Author

DanySK commented Feb 13, 2026

@S-furi can you fix the conflicts and rebase-update?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants