This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 30, 2022. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 386
fix(hooks): compute initial search parameters from widget #3399
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
this means that if this part of the function gets called, but the widget never actually mounts, there will be stray search parameters not associated to a widget (as we don't call dispose). Could this ever be a real issue?
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.
Why wouldn't the widget mount at this point?
And
getWidgetSearchParameters()
returns a value without triggering side effects, so I'm not sure to understand what you're saying.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.
getWidgetSearchParameters doesn't have any side-effects, but
helper.state = getWidgetSearchParameters()
is a side-effect.I'm not sure why it wouldn't be mounted, but I'm not 100% sure whether the contract of react allows a memo to be called before/after the component is already mounted? Are there any specs of that? Is it possible a memo is called without the rest of the component being called?
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.
Assigning
helper.state
is indeed a side effect. I think it's localized in that case because each widget overrides it for its initial rendering, and then the InstantSearch.js lifecycle takes over and sets it.React can call memo anytime that it wants to call it (for memory/optimization purposes), so there's no certainty that it'll be called only once. I don't think that the new code introduced competes with the existing logic of
useConnector()
anduseMemo()
though. We already had this consideration before this change.