Skip to content

wrap app in boundary #1416

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 15, 2025
Merged

wrap app in boundary #1416

merged 2 commits into from
Jul 15, 2025

Conversation

Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member

this allows people to use await without the ceremony of a <svelte:boundary> with a {#snippet pending()} (of course you can add one if you want to control the pending UI, otherwise it'll just be blank)

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jul 15, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Updated (UTC)
svelte-dev ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview Jul 15, 2025 3:01am

@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member Author

demo

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm in favor, approving, obviously don't merge if it looks like anyone else has significant objections

@paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member

Should we add a "The playground is wrapped in a svelte boundary so you can use async even in App.svelte" somewhere on the page so that people are aware of this (and might be less confused when they copy paste and itìs not working?

@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member Author

Nah, that's overkill. Bear in mind that we'll be getting rid of the need to have the boundary anyway when @elliott-with-the-longest-name-on-github implements async SSR later this week

@Rich-Harris Rich-Harris merged commit 49c3a0d into main Jul 15, 2025
4 checks passed
@Rich-Harris Rich-Harris deleted the async-boundary-wrapper branch July 15, 2025 10:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants