Svelte 5: Deeply nested state doesn't re-render when looping

[alex-way]

Describe the bug

It seems that when looping through a deeply nested object, svelte doesn't re-render when looping through object.

No errors are thrown in the logs which makes me think this may be a bug.

Reproduction

Repl

Click the update button and observe that the JSON.stringify correctly shows the update, but the each block isn't updated with the new value.

Note: I'm using the $inspect to force the compiler to svelte 5 mode. Without it, it works as expected.

Logs

No response

System Info

Browser: Edge

Severity

blocking all usage of svelte

[alex-way]

Maybe #9546 is related?

[brunnerh]

The #each loop variable in runes mode is no longer "connected" to the reactivity of the source array.

So unless you make the items themselves reactive, you need to use access via key on the source (which is less efficient as far as I am aware).

const state = $state(initialValue); // adds proxy reactivity to object
const roomState = writable(state);

(The statefulness would not survive complete re-assignment, so set/update probably would need to be wrapped to account for that. In Svelte 5 the use of the store should not be really necessary in the first place, though.)

REPL

{#each Object.values($roomState.users) as user (user.name)}
  {$roomState.users[user.name].value}
{/each}

REPL

[Prinzhorn]

The #each loop variable in runes mode is no longer "connected" to the reactivity of the source array.

So unless you make the items themselves reactive, you need to use access via key on the source (which is less efficient as far as I am aware).

This can't be the expected behavior for stores, this is clearly a regression that needs to be fixed.

[brunnerh]

Some migration work can be expected when switching to runes mode, but I guess it would make sense to have special treatment for stores. Store usage is at least visible to the compiler via the $store syntax, so differentiating would be possible.

[trueadm]

If we were to put in special handling when we see $store syntax, then people who might use stores without that syntax might expect it to work the same. Furthermore, what if someone did?

<script>
  // ..
  const users = Object.values($roomState.users);
</script>
{#each users as user (user.name)}
  {user.value}
{/each}

Personally, this feels like a breaking change that we need to note and cover with migration notes. We can't really do a runtime check here either.

[dummdidumm]

That snippet is static because it's not using $derived, so it would be expected to not be reactive in that case.

Can you elaborate why the change isn't noticed in this case? I haven't dug into it yet.

[trueadm]

Sorry, I meant to make it @const instead.

[Prinzhorn]

If we were to put in special handling when we see $store syntax

That's the whole idea behind stores though? Every single expression that contains $store is invalidated, when the store changes.

@const also work perfectly fine in non-runes mode and breaks in runes mode, just like with the expression in #each

then people who might use stores without that syntax might expect it to work the same

What does "without that syntax" mean? The dollar prefix is the syntax.

[trueadm]

What does "without that syntax" mean? The dollar prefix is the syntax.

It also works without the syntax in Svelte 4.

[Prinzhorn]

the syntax

I still don't know what syntax you're talking about :D. I assume you mean regular reactivity?

Also this already works perfectly fine with $state

I don't understand the discussion. The expression Object.values(foo) needs to be invalidated when foo changes? That's how Svelte works.

[trueadm]

The expression Object.values(foo) needs to be invalidated when foo changes?

Yes, but that logic can be in another function too.

<script>
  function getPeople() {
    return Object.values($roomState.users)
  }
</script>

{#each getPeople() as user (user.name)}
  {user.value}
{/each}

[brunnerh]

It works with $state because of fine-grained, deep reactivity.
E.g. the object with the value property can be extracted via $derived, modified and the change will update the UI since a signal on that object is fired, not the original state where the object is from (REPL).

And yes, indirection complicates this matter...

[Prinzhorn]

Yes, but that logic can be in another function too.

I see, not sure if anyone would expect that to work (unless you change getPeople itself). At least in my mental model that doesn't make any sense why it should work, nothing referenced in the template changes. But I feel like Svelte 5 is questioning my mental model quite a bit.

[alex-way]

Apologies if I oversimplified the original example, a slightly more complicated but hopefully more informational REPL can be found here of what I was actually doing: REPL

Effectively I'm attempting to use a derived store value. Again I could totally be wrong, but the example works with the Svelte 4 compiler but not Svelte 5 unfortunately