proposal-record-tuple VS Immer

relevant issue, which is at the crux of this problem: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-record-tuple/issues/387

There are still so many basic things that aren't in the JS stdlib, though. A good example is Map - if you need to use a tuple of two values as a key, you're SOL because there's no way to customize key comparisons. Hopefully we'll get https://tc39.es/proposal-record-tuple/ eventually, but meanwhile languages ranging from C++ to Java to Python have had some sensible way to do this for over 20 years now.

If you’re reaching for structuredClone, what you really want is native immutable Record and Tuple syntax, and the companion “deep path properties” syntax which allows for efficient and ergonomic immutable updates:

- https://github.com/tc39/proposal-record-tuple

It will be called "record" in JavaScript which will swing the popularity back the other way I guess (currently a language proposal)

I suspect considering the strong desire to maintain consistency with JavaScript, we will eventually see something that when the Record proposal passes through tc39

I hope the Record and Tuple proposal makes it through

I mean, I'd love some real immutable/persistent data structures in JS by default, or even some Immer-like syntax sugar. Something like the record/tuple proposal would be awesome.

This will become very useful once Records and Tuples are a thing, because it allows you to store object references in a record/tuple (which by definition can only contain primitives).

Record and tuple is at stage 2

Also, js has an ongoing immutable value data types proposal.

```

It looks like it’s mutating, but both the reducers and update() uses immer* under the hood, so we still respect immutability under the hood.

Cami supports redux devtools so you can use that for time-travel debugging too!

—-

* https://github.com/immerjs/immer

I heard that immutability libraries like immer.js [0] help with this. Anyone go this way and had good success? Is this 'the way'?

[0]: https://immerjs.github.io/immer/

So, that's what we built, and we built it in the most obvious way — using JavaScript Proxy objects to track mutations and reflect those changes across Appsmith’s framework. Initially things looked good — it worked, aside from a few hacks to make some data types work with map and set, and we were following the example of other projects that had similar requirements. If it was good enough for them, it should be good enough for us, right?

But is immer really the ultimate answer? The performance problem of immer is more prominent in large arrays and deep-level object scenarios. See this issue description, many authors in the community began to try to make breakthroughs, and noticed that structura and mutative, I found that it is indeed many times faster than immer as they said, but it still fails to solve the problem of both fast speed and good development experience. I will analyze the two issues in detail below.

I like immer for this kind of thing: https://github.com/immerjs/immer

It gives you immutable updates without getting bogged down in FP abstractions.

I've always been a huge fan of immer for these case. For your code, it would simply turn into setGridData((prev) => produce(prev, draft => applyChanges(changes, draft)) but I recommend you go over their documentation to fully understand how it works

If you're trying to make things actually immutable, Object.freeze and deep copies can clutter things up pretty good, have you considered using something like immer? (https://immerjs.github.io/immer/)

If you want to set up from Context, Zustand is your best bet. It offers an extremely simple API that lets you create a store with values and functions. Then, you can access that store from anywhere in your application to read and write values. Reactivity included! If you want to store nested object data in your store, consider using Immer alongside Zustand to easily change nested state.