feat: support configurable schedulers for timed composables by 9romise · Pull Request #5070 · vueuse/vueuse

9romise · 2025-09-25T17:26:20Z

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

Read the Contributing Guidelines.
Read the Pull Request Guidelines.
Check that there isn't already a PR that solves the problem the same way to avoid creating a duplicate.
Provide a description in this PR that addresses what the PR is solving, or reference the issue that it solves (e.g. fixes #123).
Ideally, include relevant tests that fail without this PR but pass with it.

⚠️ Slowing down new functions

Warning: Slowing down new functions

As the VueUse audience continues to grow, we have been inundated with an overwhelming number of feature requests and pull requests. As a result, maintaining the project has become increasingly challenging and has stretched our capacity to its limits. As such, in the near future, we may need to slow down our acceptance of new features and prioritize the stability and quality of existing functions. Please note that new features for VueUse may not be accepted at this time. If you have any new ideas, we suggest that you first incorporate them into your own codebase, iterate on them to suit your needs, and assess their generalizability. If you strongly believe that your ideas are beneficial to the community, you may submit a pull request along with your use cases, and we would be happy to review and discuss them. Thank you for your understanding.

Description

This PR unifies the options of composables built on top of useIntervalFn and introduces a customizable scheduler option:

There are also a few functions that currently allow choosing between useRafFn and useIntervalFn through an interval option. I didn’t make changes to those in this PR, and I’d like to hear everyone’s thoughts on this. If we can make the custom scheduler compatible with both useIntervalFn and useRafFn, it will avoid having to import both useIntervalFn and useRafFn.

~~We can update the configurations documentation once we’ve discussed and agreed on a suitable approach.~~

Additional context

Related: #5043

pkg-pr-new · 2025-09-25T17:28:28Z

Open in StackBlitz

@vueuse/components

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/components@5070

@vueuse/core

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/core@5070

@vueuse/electron

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/electron@5070

@vueuse/firebase

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/firebase@5070

@vueuse/integrations

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/integrations@5070

@vueuse/math

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/math@5070

@vueuse/metadata

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/metadata@5070

@vueuse/nuxt

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/nuxt@5070

@vueuse/router

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/router@5070

@vueuse/rxjs

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/rxjs@5070

@vueuse/shared

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@vueuse/shared@5070

commit: 618461b

codecov · 2025-09-25T17:32:30Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 61.76471% with 39 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 66.72%. Comparing base (68807a7) to head (618461b).
⚠️ Report is 24 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
packages/core/useMemory/index.ts	0.00%	16 Missing ⚠️
packages/core/useElementByPoint/index.ts	11.11%	8 Missing ⚠️
packages/shared/useInterval/index.ts	0.00%	8 Missing ⚠️
packages/core/useVibrate/index.ts	0.00%	7 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5070      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   65.93%   66.72%   +0.78%     
==========================================
  Files         365      365              
  Lines       14565    14624      +59     
  Branches     2388     2409      +21     
==========================================
+ Hits         9604     9758     +154     
+ Misses       4950     4855      -95     
  Partials       11       11

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

antfu · 2025-10-01T01:02:23Z

I would be happy to see useRafFn to be a valid scheduler

9romise · 2025-10-01T16:28:00Z

packages/shared/utils/scheduler.ts

+  /**
+   * Custom scheduler to use for interval execution.
+   *
+   * @default useRafFn


The only difference is the default value in the JSDoc; I'm not sure if there's a better way to make it more noticeable to users.

9romise · 2025-10-01T16:28:27Z

packages/shared/utils/scheduler.ts

+  /**
+   * Start the interval immediately
+   *
+   * @default false


Same as above.

9romise · 2025-10-01T16:33:11Z

packages/core/useCountdown/index.ts

-  }, options?.interval ?? 1000, { immediate: options?.immediate ?? false })
+  const {
+    scheduler = useIntervalFn,
+    interval = 1000,


I’d like to get some opinions on whether it’s necessary to explicitly set default values in the top-level functions, rather than passing undefined and letting the underlying scheduler handle it.

Just want to note that different functions handle this differently, and all properties in SchedulerOptions have this situation.

9romise · 2025-10-01T16:36:11Z

I would be happy to see useRafFn to be a valid scheduler

Absolutely agree! I did run into some issues earlier, but after some more thought, I realized I was overcomplicating it. I've now found a clean solution and have pushed the updates.

9romise · 2025-10-01T16:37:54Z

packages/shared/useIntervalFn/index.ts

 */
-export function useIntervalFn(cb: Fn, interval: MaybeRefOrGetter<number> = 1000, options: UseIntervalFnOptions = {}): UseIntervalFnReturn {
+export function useIntervalFn(cb: Fn, interval: MaybeRefOrGetter<number>, options?: UseIntervalFnOptions): UseIntervalFnReturn
+export function useIntervalFn(cb: Fn, options?: SchedulerOptions): UseIntervalFnReturn


Overloaded the method and implemented the Scheduler interface.

9romise · 2025-10-01T16:41:22Z

Since this PR touches multiple files, I'd recommend adding tests to prevent regressions before we merge.

9romise · 2025-10-01T16:45:10Z

I'd like to gather some input on:

Whether we should unify the default values for each method
Whether we should explicitly set default values for each method at the top level
Whether there’s a better way to handle different default values across methods without breaking the user experience

9romise added 2 commits September 26, 2025 00:51

feat: support custom scheduler

c7259e7

chore: update useInterval

2e46cfc

9romise added 5 commits September 26, 2025 01:36

chore: update types

bc66c89

feat: support scheduler without interval

b3e4bfb

chore: update

4f2d678

chore: revert b3e4bfb

096f0b9

docs: update config

677d0e1

9romise added 8 commits October 1, 2025 17:45

feat(useIntervalFn): implement Scheduler interface

9eb1ea3

test: add default value case

ecb498e

refactor: rename interface

bc61406

chore: update

f87033a

feat: support more composables

567f0e0

feat: deprecate interval: 'requestAnimationFrame'

288d1fd

chore: update types

2680b78

docs: update

618461b

9romise changed the title ~~feat: add custom scheduler option to useIntervalFn-based composables and unify options~~ feat: support configurable schedulers for timed composables Oct 1, 2025

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

9romise marked this pull request as ready for review October 1, 2025 16:33

dosubot bot added size:L This PR changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. enhancement New feature or request labels Oct 1, 2025

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

9romise requested review from 43081j, OrbisK, antfu, ilyaliao and scottbedard October 1, 2025 16:38

9romise marked this pull request as draft October 2, 2025 13:06

9romise mentioned this pull request Oct 31, 2025

feat: support configurable scheduler for timed composables #5129

Merged

9romise closed this Nov 11, 2025

9romise deleted the fest/scheduler branch November 11, 2025 14:30

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Comments

feat: support configurable schedulers for timed composables#5070

feat: support configurable schedulers for timed composables#5070
9romise wants to merge 15 commits intomainfrom
fest/scheduler

9romise commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

pkg-pr-new bot commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

antfu commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Uh oh!

Comments

Conversation

9romise commented Sep 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

Description

Additional context

Uh oh!

pkg-pr-new bot commented Sep 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Sep 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

antfu commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise Oct 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

9romise commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

9romise commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

pkg-pr-new bot commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading