Warnings about missing initial state for anonymous components with a `:componentName` about fulcro

[awkay]

What do you mean it has initial state? The code you just provided creates a new component, which in fact, does not have initial state...nor is initial state even remotely what you'd want in this case, since such an on-the-fly component is never used in the initial state graph of the application (I mean, you can add initial-state to the options map if you're using this with def and composing it into that tree), but most uses of nc are well after the app initialization when initial state is used. Perhaps you're confusing your terminology and mean something else?

[awkay]

Oh sorry...you're complaining that the warning doesn't take into account that the given component doesn't need initial state? Sorry, not going to fix that. It has a constant ident, and you technically could use it with def and create the problem the warning is talking about.

[MrEbbinghaus]

I would say that it is very confusing when you get a warning about something that might be a problem that you didn't even cause yourself, don't you think?

Maybe the initial-state function of the anonymous component should include initial-state of its edges?
{:car/owner (rc/initial-state <anonymous user component>)}

Or maybe components shouldn't have any implicit initial-state at all?

[awkay]

Hm. That is worth considering. I don't remember what I gave them a default initial state. At this point it would be a breaking change to remove it. So, I think we're stuck with the warning. I guess we could put a marker on nc-built components so the warning could skip them.

[MrEbbinghaus]

Would adding the missing edge to the child component in the initial-state be a breaking change?

[awkay]

Try 3.5.18-SNAPSHOT. I've turned off warning for nc components altogether. That do it?

[awkay]

Fixed in 3.5.18