Allow object/reference values #31
Description
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
It's fairly common to want to be able to select an object or reference to an object from a select. For instance, you may be wanting to associate a relationship with an Ember Data model. Currently, this requires a lot of boilerplate with this component, because <option> serializes the value passed to it as a string always. So, you would have to do something like:
class MyComponent extends Component {
options = [{
id: 1,
name: "turtle",
}, {
id: 2,
name: "mako",
}];
@tracked selected = this.options[0];
handleChange = (event) => {
let selectedId = event.target.selectedOptions[0].value;
this.selected = this.options.find(option => option.id === selectedId);
};
}IMO this isn't as much of a performance worry because setting is not super common, but it's a lot to write for something that is pretty common in my day-to-day use cases.
Describe the solution you'd like
Ideally, it would be possible to get the selected value by reference some how. So you could do something like:
class MyComponent extends Component {
options = [{
id: 1,
name: "turtle",
}, {
id: 2,
name: "mako",
}];
@tracked selected = this.options[0];
handleChange = (event) => {
this.selected = event.target.selectedOptions[0].value;
};
}Or ideally, combined with #30, it could become:
As far as I can tell, however, this would mean that the current ability to use <option> directly wouldn't work any longer, because option values always get serialized to strings 😕 this is definitely annoying, it would mean that the API would have to pass a closure component like:
This would in my opinion be worth it though, because the ability to handle references is really important, and the common use case wouldn't require using this form (you would just pass in @options instead).
Describe alternatives you've considered
We could possibly support both option and a curried component, and option could be used for string values:
I'm not sure about this API, whether it would be more or less confusing. Also, I think it would complicate the internal logic a lot.
I'll keep thinking about if there is a way to somehow pass a reference directly into an attribute on an <option>.