[pull] main from facebook:main#334
Merged
Merged
Conversation
When checking ValidateExhaustiveDeps internally, this seems to be the most common case that it flags. The current exhaustive-deps rule allows extraneous deps if they are a set of stable types. So here we reuse our existing isStableType() util in the compiler to allow this case. --- [//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER) Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/35185). * #35201 * #35202 * #35192 * #35190 * #35186 * __->__ #35185
…an inferred deps (#35186) Since adding this validation we've already changed our inference to use knowledge from manual memoization to inform when values are frozen and which values are non-nullable. To align with that, if the user chooses to use different optionality btw the deps and the memo block/callback, that's fine. The key is that eg `x?.y` will invalidate whenever `x.y` would, so from a memoization correctness perspective its fine. It's not our job to be a type checker: if a value is potentially nullable, it should likely use a nullable property access in both places but TypeScript/Flow can check that. --- [//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER) Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/35186). * #35201 * #35202 * #35192 * #35190 * __->__ #35186
The existing exhaustive-deps rule allows omitting non-reactive dependencies, even if they're not memoized. Conceptually, if a value is non-reactive then it cannot semantically change. Even if the value is a new object, that object represents the exact same value and doesn't necessitate redoing downstream computation. Thus its fine to exclude nonreactive dependencies, whether they're a stable type or not. --- [//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER) Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/35190). * #35201 * #35202 * #35192 * __->__ #35190
…rule (#35192) Similar to ValidateHookUsage, we implement this check in the compiler for safety but (for now) continue to rely on the existing rule for actually reporting errors to users. --- [//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER) Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/35192). * #35201 * #35202 * __->__ #35192
…5202) --- [//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER) Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/35202). * #35201 * __->__ #35202
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
See Commits and Changes for more details.
Created by
pull[bot] (v2.0.0-alpha.4)
Can you help keep this open source service alive? 💖 Please sponsor : )