-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Data: Rerun selection if state changed during mount #11777
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I did try it against https://github.com/wordpress-mobile/gutenberg-mobile/tree/add/gb-store-test and it fixed the issue 👍
@@ -48,13 +48,23 @@ const withSelect = ( mapSelectToProps ) => createHigherOrderComponent( ( Wrapped | |||
constructor( props ) { | |||
super( props ); | |||
|
|||
this.onStoreChange = this.onStoreChange.bind( this ); | |||
|
|||
this.subscribe( props.registry ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Subscribing in constructor can cause subscriptions to leak in two cases:
- when server-side rendering, constructor is called, but
componentWillUnmount
never is. - in React Fiber concurrent mode, component instances can be constructed, but never actually committed to DOM. This can happen when Fiber is working through rendering a low-priority update (calling constructors and
render
methods) and suddenly a higher priority update is scheduled that invalidates the work that's been done. Then the unfinished low-priority work will be thrown away and restarted. In such a case, constructor is called, but thecomponent(DidMount|WillUnmount)
methods aren't.
The correct place to subscribe is therefore always componentDidMount
.
Then, of course, we might miss a store update that happened between constructor and componentDidMount
.
react-redux
solves that by rerunning the selector (i.e., mapStateToProps
) in componentDidMount
and calling forceUpdate
if anything changed. That's the stable v5.1.1.
In master, they have an unreleased beta version where the Redux provider and consumer are rewritten using the new React context API and where the connect
-ed consumers don't subscribe to the store at all. Just the Provider does. That could be an inspiration for the @wordpress/data
internals, too 🙂
Conclusion: this patch solves the bug that @Tug discovered, but other subtle issues are still present.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Subscribing in the constructor is important for another use-case. It's important that the parent's component rerenders before its children do. For example when you remove a block, you don't want its inner components to rerender, you want the block list to rerender first to remove the block before the selectors of a removed block get called.
There's probably a better way to fix it but moving to componentDidMount causes the components to rerender in the wrong order because componentDidMount
of children components runs before parents. I wonder how connect
solves this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Found a comment that I believe explains it: reduxjs/react-redux#1079 (comment)
Makes me wonder if we should use a per component listener?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In react-redux
, nested connected components don't subscribe directly to the Redux store, but there is a nested hierarchy of Subscription
objects and each child component subscribes to the parent's Subscription
. Only components that don't have any connected parent subscribe directly to the store. Then the Subscription
object makes sure that the listener of its owner is called first, and the listeners of the children are called after it. Something like this:
constructor() {
this.subscription = new Subscription();
// `this` is always the first subscriber
this.subscription.subscribe( this.onStateChange );
}
componentDidMount() {
this.subscription.subscribeToParent();
}
componentDidUnmount() {
this.subscription.unsubscribeFromParent();
}
The parent subscription object is passed down to children in context. And then each child in turn passes a different parent subscription to its children.
It's very clever and satisfies all the subtle requirements: no leaks, parent listener called before children...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd be fine with something like this if proposed, seems like a good enhancement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The latest React Redux 6 beta is even better. It uses React.createContext
and only the Provider
subscribes to anything. The connected components receive the latest Redux state through the context and rerender if anything relevant changed. Parent component receives the updated context before children do. Everything is much simpler and it just works.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm interested in exploring further enhancements, and have a few ideas floating in my head related to what's been discussed here. To clarify, do these concerns impact whether this should be merged as-is?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To clarify, do these concerns impact whether this should be merged as-is?
No. As far as I know, this PR makes things better and doesn't make anything worse 🚢
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Gotcha, great. And thanks for the additional context. While I've done my fair share of scouring react-redux
source, in how you've laid it out here, there seems to be much we could still do to improve. I'll plan to dig deeper very shortly 🙂
This pull request seeks to resolve an issue with the
@wordpress/data
withSelect
higher-order component which would have prevented a wrapped component from receiving the most up-to-date store values if it had incurred a store state change during its own mount (e.g. dispatching during its own constructor).Testing instructions:
Ensure unit tests pass:
cc @jsnajdr @Tug