Fix nested hook call

[SukkaW]

The PR continues from #15.

The PR fixes these:

import { useA, useB, useC, useD, useE, useF, useG, useH } from 'whatever'

function Example(props) {
  let a = null;
  return useA(
    useB(),
    [useC(), 'array'],
    { d: useD(), [useE()]: useF(), ...useG() },
    `testA${useH()}testB`,
    useI() === useJ(),
    (a = useK()),
    ...useJ()
  );
}

import { useA, useB, useC } from 'whatever'

function Example(props) {
  let a = null;
  return { [useA()]: useB(), ...useC(), [`testA${useH()}testB`]: useI() === useJ(), assign: (a = useK()) }
}

The PR handles a lot more nested hook call cases. The unit test case is also added.

[lxsmnsyc]

I'm thinking right now if we can scan the expression ahead of time and check if it has a hook call, opting-out of optimization, much like isConstant, but instead we return optimizedExpr(expr, undefined).

I feel like partial optimization is too complex for now.

[SukkaW]

I'm thinking right now if we can scan the expression ahead of time and check if it has a hook call, opting-out of optimization, much like isConstant, but instead we return optimizedExpr(expr, undefined).

I feel like partial optimization is too complex for now.

Yeah. I have noticed that, too. And that's exactly why I have converted the PR to the draft.

I am trying a different approach (which I haven't pushed yet!) to address the fix.

[SukkaW]

@lxsmnsyc I have refactored the bailout: bf78713 (#18)

[lxsmnsyc]

@SukkaW I don't think this covers everything yet. A correct implementation is really difficult so I guess I would discourage you on doing that for now. A check like isConstant in optimizeExpression is definitely ideal in here.

[SukkaW]

@SukkaW I don't think this covers everything yet. A correct implementation is really difficult so I guess I would discourage you on doing that for now. A check like isConstant in optimizeExpression is definitely ideal in here.

I have implemented is-contains-hook.ts based on the is-constant.ts in a191ae0 (#18)

[lxsmnsyc]

This looks great! Thank you. I'll expand from your work.

[SukkaW]

This looks great! Thank you. I'll expand from your work.

@lxsmnsyc My next PR will focus on merging is-contains-hook and is-constant into one file (to avoid duplicated code), and try to run the traverse only once. Will that affect your plan?

[lxsmnsyc]

@SukkaW You probably shouldn't. This is fine for 0.5.0. I have a plan for 0.6.0 to properly merge this all.