[FR] Allow daisy-chaining when adding children to ValueTrees

[LiamG]

It turns out that returning the child ValueTree isn’t as safe as it first seems.

If you did something like this…

    auto child = juce::ValueTree("parent")
        .addAndReturnChild(juce::ValueTree("child"), nullptr);

…the “parent” ValueTree would go out of scope, and you’d be left with an orphaned child. The existing API forces us to keep “parent” in scope, thus avoiding this problem.

See my other post here:

[FR] Monadic operators on ValueTree

[promising code to begin with, but bad news ahead] I built another simple class without the lambdas, which in theory can address all three feature requests at once (daisy-chaining, default undoManager, and or_else). class SpeedyVT { public: SpeedyVT(const juce::ValueTree& vt_) : vt(vt_) {} SpeedyVT setProp(const juce::Identifier& id, const juce::var& v, juce::UndoManager* um = nullptr) { if (vt.isValid()) vt.setProperty(id, v, um); return vt; } …