fix[ENG-8003]: Changing the entry on a symbol does not update the preview window

[yash-builder]

Description

This PR fixes an issue where symbol content was not updating correctly. The fix compares the previous symbol entry with the incoming symbol entry—if they are not equal, it triggers fetchSymbolContent to ensure the latest content is loaded.

Changes Made:

• Added a comparison check between the previous and incoming symbol entries.
• Triggered fetchSymbolContent if the entries differ to update the content.

Why This Change Was Made:
To ensure symbol content updates correctly when the symbol entry changes, improving accuracy and consistency in the preview.

Loom
https://www.loom.com/share/032123ec4a7f449db7690eb9ca022f3e?sid=3964bfa8-ac48-428a-a376-91568c447213

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: eb5362f

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 7 packages

Name	Type
@builder.io/sdk-angular	Patch
@builder.io/sdk-qwik	Patch
@builder.io/sdk-react	Patch
@builder.io/sdk-react-native	Patch
@builder.io/sdk-solid	Patch
@builder.io/sdk-svelte	Patch
@builder.io/sdk-vue	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[nx-cloud]

View your CI Pipeline Execution ↗ for commit eb5362f.

Command	Status	Duration	Result
nx test @e2e/qwik-city	✅ Succeeded	8m 41s	View ↗
nx test @e2e/nuxt	✅ Succeeded	8m 11s	View ↗
nx test @e2e/nextjs-sdk-next-app	✅ Succeeded	8m 16s	View ↗
nx test @e2e/angular-16-ssr	✅ Succeeded	6m 58s	View ↗
nx test @e2e/angular-16	✅ Succeeded	6m 48s	View ↗
nx test @e2e/angular-19-ssr	✅ Succeeded	6m 31s	View ↗
nx test @e2e/react-sdk-next-15-app	✅ Succeeded	6m 16s	View ↗
nx test @e2e/react-sdk-next-14-app	✅ Succeeded	6m 5s	View ↗
Additional runs (36)	✅ Succeeded	...	View ↗

---

☁️ Nx Cloud last updated this comment at 2025-04-02 14:08:08 UTC

[gitguardian]

⚠️ GitGuardian has uncovered 1 secret following the scan of your pull request.

Please consider investigating the findings and remediating the incidents. Failure to do so may lead to compromising the associated services or software components.

Since your pull request originates from a forked repository, GitGuardian is not able to associate the secrets uncovered with secret incidents on your GitGuardian dashboard.
Skipping this check run and merging your pull request will create secret incidents on your GitGuardian dashboard.

🔎 Detected hardcoded secret in your pull request

GitGuardian id	GitGuardian status	Secret	Commit	Filename
11707119	Triggered	Generic High Entropy Secret	c3245e0	packages/sdks/snippets/svelte/src/components/blueprints/BlogArticle.svelte	View secret

🛠 Guidelines to remediate hardcoded secrets

1. Understand the implications of revoking this secret by investigating where it is used in your code.
2. Replace and store your secret safely. Learn here the best practices.
3. Revoke and rotate this secret.
4. If possible, rewrite git history. Rewriting git history is not a trivial act. You might completely break other contributing developers' workflow and you risk accidentally deleting legitimate data.

To avoid such incidents in the future consider

• following these best practices for managing and storing secrets including API keys and other credentials
• install secret detection on pre-commit to catch secret before it leaves your machine and ease remediation.

---

^{🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request.}

[sidmohanty11]

you're missing a few things, i created a loom explaining what all changes you need to do so that you can properly mock the fetch calls

https://www.loom.com/share/62e673c3668342949f1df71b72b921f3

let me know if you have any questions

[yash-builder]

@samijaber

Interestingly, when I run them individually, my fix resolves the issue, but the test case still fails. I’m wondering if I’m missing something. I’ve recorded a Loom

https://www.loom.com/share/ac1bd9c4d6c346efa3899250ce9b8220?sid=25f81646-040e-4c42-856b-ed13d938e772

[sidmohanty11]

LGTM! requires a changeset