Improve dot notation for updating nested objects

[dplewis]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #729 into master will increase coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #729      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.59%   88.64%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          53       53              
  Lines        4541     4562      +21     
  Branches     1054     1060       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits         4023     4044      +21     
  Misses        518      518

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/ParseObject.js	89.64% <100%> (+0.16%)	⬆️
src/ObjectStateMutations.js	100% <100%> (ø)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update fcd43da...784c278. Read the comment docs.

[dplewis]

@flovilmart This test case works for PG also

[flovilmart]

Well, there is to test also all the other cases: setting a value on ‘key.path’ and increment when it’s not an object stored behind, unset(‘key.path’) etc...

_{Sent with GitHawk}

[flovilmart]

I am very worry bad things will happen with that much decoupling but if you beliebe this is ‘needed’ go ahead

_{Sent with GitHawk}

[dplewis]

@flovilmart I did run into two issues with this.

You can't set or update nested documents on new objects.

const obj = new TestObject();
obj.set('objectField.number', 20); // Throws internal server error because field doesn't exist
// we could ignore this or separate this into an object

If field exist the local data doesn't update until saved

Don't know much about internal states of parse objects to update local data

const obj = new TestObject({ objectField: { number: 5 } });
await obj.save();
// obj.get('objectField').number is 5
obj.set('objectField.number', 20);
// obj.get('objectField').number is still 5
await obj.save();
// obj.get('objectField').number is now 20

[flovilmart]

Do what you feel is best

_{Sent with GitHawk}

[dplewis]

@flovilmart I resolved both issues I stated on the client side. Can you look this over?

[flovilmart]

I still have bad feelings about this, but go ahead.

_{Sent with GitHawk}

[dplewis]

Thanks! I’m going to play around with it more. There a lot of features that use set() like add, addUnique etc