HOW BEAUTIFUL IS THIS FRIENDS!

That title and thumbnail! 💯 Man thanks A LOT for all the content

Certainly! Here's a refined version: At last, I've been inquiring about how to swap out a Store in the favorites of Runes. Despite scouring through the documentation, I couldn't find any explanation on how to do so. Gracias señor 😀

I'm soooooo excited that we're getting Svelte5 content again. This was also fantastic because it was a very realistic and useful sample case.

Great video!

look guys how beatiful is this! 😊 This is top phrase

I'll be keeping this for when Svelte 5 becomes stable 🔥

@JoyofCodeDev

19 күн бұрын

It's already stable! 😄

@novaotp

19 күн бұрын

@@JoyofCodeDev well, omw to try it out 😄

@JoyofCodeDev

19 күн бұрын

the release candidate is out

@ariefnurandono9917

18 күн бұрын

@@JoyofCodeDev it's hard when another basic library not upgraded yet. sonner, shadcn, bits-ui it still cannot be used

@cedricol

17 күн бұрын

We don't really know whether it's stable, it hasn't been "in the wild" for very long. I'll wait until we actually know. But I'm exited about it. Heard a lot of good things from people who switched a while ago.

I've developed a Rune function designed to serve as a store, and now I'm pondering how to effectively set the track and retrieve the stored value on a separate file. The track is an object containing track info, like title, duration, etc. function trackState(value) { let track = $state(value); return { get track() { return track}, set track(value) { track = value } } } export { trackState };

I find it so weird that Svelte 5 isnt released yet. It feels like people talk more about 5 than about 4 to a point where I tried to use 5's features in 4's codebase.

@cubondemais

19 күн бұрын

It's because Svelte 5 is the king of cohesion compared to Svelte 3 and 4 AND it also has signals, so the hype is massive. We're just anxiously waiting to have Svelte 5 production ready to start slowly porting our codebases to remove all our bad code that's working around Svelte's design flaws, like the inability to spread callbacks or bad dependency detection with reactive statements

@BboyKeny

13 күн бұрын

The first release candidate was released and it's believed that the syntax won't be changed as it is now. It means it's the right time to learn it before v1 with side projects

Pretty beautiful

quite interested in the custom "use" function, aka hook or composition, thanks for the inspiration

You're awesome !!!

Jason and Yamel ❤

Muito feliz de acompanhar mais uma encarnação do rap cru! Muito progresso pra vocês! Não sei se for pra todos, mas o áudio me incomodou em certos momentos, as vozes pareciam muito distantes do microfone e não dava pra entender bem o que foi falado. Com esse ajuste a qualidade técnica vai ficar em 110%!

Nice video! In this case, we could do this in a regular TS file since runes are not used in there, right?

Can anyone recommend a good test setup for testing Svelte runes reactivity?

“a class is more performant because a function is more expensive” … huh? can you link a source on this, this statement differs from my expectation

@JoyofCodeDev

19 күн бұрын

I think it has to do with closures but I'm not sure since it was a concern early in the development of runes

@antoniobennett6338

19 күн бұрын

If I remember correctly it’s because for some reason V8 optimizes the heck out of classes. I know Dominic has raised this with the V8 team. Classes are also faster in the context of runes because they aren’t proxied like objects.

@maninalift

19 күн бұрын

I had to think about this for a moment but i realised that every time you create a closure, it will basically keep a copy of the function. On the other hand an instance of a class will just hold your values and point to the prototype which holds the definition of the function. That's not based on any deep understanding of javascript mind you. I could be wrong. EDIT: a quick look into it suggests my thought was in fact correct.

@mikuhl

18 күн бұрын

I think its mainly how each function has a new resource location, but if its in a class multiple instances of a class can share the same resource location for a function.

Does an effect hold a weak reference to the signal? If the signal should be garbage collected will the effect be freed? Or does the effect need to be manually destroyed somehow.

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

you don't have to think about it

I like the { value } approach instead of getters and setter, but I wonder should I worry about the performance? i'm sure I heard Rich saying that proxies are not the most performant

@JoyofCodeDev

19 күн бұрын

you should be fine

Great stuff! When is the potion class? :D

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

ordinary wizarding levels exams are just around the corner

Yaaaaa hoooo 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

I'd love to see $props and in some future videos relating to svelte5

@baxalasse

18 күн бұрын

#snippets, $props and $bindable not a fan.

@DeviantFox

18 күн бұрын

@@baxalasse I think I'll grow to like them, just need experience and to see what some others are doing to idea generate.

@baxalasse

7 күн бұрын

I will also miss the component constructor

Thanks!

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

thank you! 🙏

Magicccc🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

It looks like simple Java for frontend

After a refresh it first shows a 0 and with a slight delay it updates the value to what is inside localstorage. Is there a way to immediately show the localstorage value?

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

you could show nothing

@arjix8738

17 күн бұрын

there is a way, granted I know nothing about svelte but it should be along the lines of const count = $state(JSON.parse(localStorage.getItem('count') || "{count:0}")?.count || 0)

@sproott1498

16 күн бұрын

Thing is that local storage is only available in the browser, whereas in SvelteKit, the page is prerendered on the server. You would have to use a cookie instead (these are sent to the server with each request) and use that during the server render.

@phoneywheeze9959

6 күн бұрын

i think you can use the {#await} block

5:06 Why does the effect rune run inside a function definition?

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

you can use it anywhere

@portalteam5832

14 күн бұрын

@@JoyofCodeDev anywhere in `\.svelte(\.(ts|js))?` files **

Now, The Most important Think That You should Teach Us Is About the props, i’m hatting that system along with the way to render the old . Please

@JoyofCodeDev

19 күн бұрын

I love the new `$props` rune

@AlanDanielx

19 күн бұрын

You now have to specify an interface for types with $props() which is not as good, Now i have a question to you, how to render the children, it seems i have to specify children as part of props, isnt it? Also.. using runes wont allow you to use on:click|preventDefault

@JoyofCodeDev

19 күн бұрын

I don't miss it 😄

@AlanDanielx

19 күн бұрын

@@JoyofCodeDev you didnt answer my question about how to render children / slot ☹️

@TheVertical92

18 күн бұрын

@@AlanDanielx Yes you use the children prop and then the {@render children}, if i remember correctly

Hey, would you guys be interested in a visual scripting tool to built sveltekit applications ?

I really don’t understand how any of this can be considered magic when even Angular 1 had all this in 2009

Reminds me of RuneScape 😅

@JoyofCodeDev

19 күн бұрын

the name for runes was inspired by some VR game Ragnarock

@Dhalucario

19 күн бұрын

Runes remind me of DOOM

Bless us with a video benchmarking the difference between class and closure stores. It seems unintuitive that classes would be faster… Let’s find out!

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

I might consider it

is it me, or it looks like hooks?

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

that's a limiting way to think about runes because runes are just reactive primitives you can use to do whatever you want

@arjix8738

17 күн бұрын

@@JoyofCodeDev so you are saying that hooks are not reactive primitives you can use to do whatever you want?

@JoyofCodeDev

5 күн бұрын

react is not even reactive

i could feel typescript would be a problem. too much unnecessary type check

@arjix8738

17 күн бұрын

what do you mean "too much unnecessary type check"? cause I barely saw any type usage in this video, other than the generic function

@zummon

16 күн бұрын

@@arjix8738 when just add something new you need to specify more types, in the end would end up to be any type. for me i feel when i code i need to make it simple to clear up something and add more another things. just share my thinking, maybe future typescript would be useful for me one day

Classes don't make you write any better code, that is ridiculous. Any method can be a function and you will have exactly the same code split. What classes do is depend on their this context, that you can very easily get dettached from, which will result in runtime errors and no compiler will warn you about that

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

no one said that

What do we keep adding new terminology. Runes, spells … it stupid

@fyfoh

18 күн бұрын

I agree. And it looks like we're converging back to React-looking code. And the effect stuff- maybe I'm out of the loop, but I thought there was onMount.

@levicoderman

18 күн бұрын

You are out of the loop, the names are similar but they don't work the same at all

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

why not

Using `any` is a sign of bad design. Instead of proliferating your codebase with uses of any, sending the message to other developers that this is a good thing to do, use `unknown` instead. This way new developers learning from you will not get bad habits like we are seeing for decades now due to poor documentation and blog posts.

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

`any` is fine

@TVDaJa

17 күн бұрын

I agree that 'any' should be avoided when ever possible imo, but he even removes the 'any's later on and uses generics

@arjix8738

17 күн бұрын

@@JoyofCodeDev any is fine when I am the one using it but when I go help a coworker with her code and the entire codebase is using any, lying to typescript with fake types, it is sickening if someone does not know when to use any, they shouldn't use it at all, unknown is the better alternative

@neociber24

17 күн бұрын

For this simple example I don't think it matters that much, he could just use JS.

So needlessly over-engineered...

@JoyofCodeDev

17 күн бұрын

okay

@arjix8738

17 күн бұрын

I wouldn't call this over-engineered

I am still going to miss the svelte 4 `let count = 0;` Why can't we just have this, maybe opt in. It is so nice for isolated, simple ui components.

@isaacdruin

17 күн бұрын

Pretty sure you still can? I haven't had time to watch the whole video, but doesn't he just talk about storing the state through page reloads?

@jayc413

17 күн бұрын

Svelte 4 would still be valid when svelte 5 is released but by svelte 6,7 etc they will slowly deprecated some functionality if I'm remembering correctly