A long long long time ago, we used React with classes, remember?
At that time, we had the concept of lifecycle methods, methods on the classes that accepted callbacks that would be executed in certain moments. The big three: on mount, on update and on unmount.
Old, but gold classes
That was important, on the classes components the returned JSX was made on render method, the state attached to the this of the component, and the app developer needed a way to know to do actions in certain moments. We had the idea of the time on the life of a component:
- componentDidMount is the moment the component renders for the first time and adds elements to the DOM and is the moment to start connection and side effects such as API requests.
- shouldComponentUpdate allows you to manually set your logic to compare the next props and state and return a boolean to define if the re-render could be skipped or not.
- componentDidUpdate is the moment the state or props changed, calling render method again and doing the reconciliation changes to identity difference and apply to the DOM, good to sync state with new props and do logic stuff.
- componentWillUnmount is when React would remove the elements from the DOM and was a good place to clean things and avoid memory leaks.
And of course, you had an important API such as forceUpdate, that allowed you to manually trigger a re-render if you are using external data that would not connect with React state updates.
At a conceptual level, we have a more direct way of conducting the flow of the app. The lifecycle methods followed a similar life cycle of a DOM element, you could do memo and forceUpdates by yourself, syncing state was the default way of doing logic.
This directness was seen as simplicity, and to learn these concepts was easier compared with the reactive model. But then, hooks arrived and changed everything.
The unnamed reactivity
The transition was confusing. First, in a search to make it easy, and sort of, maintain the conceptual vision of React model that devs had, a lot of communications tried to show the similarities on the hooks model. To have the 3 main life cycles methods, they showed workarounds with useEffect.
// componentDidMount useEffect(() => { // code... // componentWillUnmount: return function cleanup() { // code... }; }, []); // componentDidUpdate useEffect(() => { // code... }, [dependencyState, dependencyProp]);
So, most of the new React code made with hooks followed this idea, and starting to sync state was a natural process. In order to keep the same idea of lifecycle methods, it was the place to call setState and trigger the re-render process.
What is the problem with it?
Syncing state became a problem, the wrong usage of useEffect became a problem, double re-renders became a problem, too much re-renders became a problem, performance became a problem.
It’s a little bit confusing this step from React, at least for me. Because, the move to hooks was a move to a reactive model, even if it’s a coarse-grained one. But the communication was that nothing really big changed. No content about the reactivity concepts and theory, even working for years with React, I just started to really understand reactivity reading Ryan Carniato’s blog posts about reactivity and solid.
Even knowing that useEffect had a misuse, I really didn’t understand why, and this lack of conceptual theory about reactivity makes committing mistakes with hooks so easy. useEffect became the most hated hook, being called “useFootgun” for some people. The point is, there is a conceptual confusion in React that expresses itself as all the issues with useEffect we see today.
useEffect issues are not the cause of the problem, but the consequence.
What about life cycle with hooks
So, this is the thing. There is no life cycle in the concept of reactivity.
You have a change, you react to it deriving and doing side effects. Effects are the consequence, not the cause. There is no state sync and no concepts of mount and unmount.
It should not matter if it is the first, the 10th or the last render before unmount, and the hooks don’t care for it, by the way, even useEffect.
Try it:
// componentDidMount useEffect(() => { // code... // componentWillUnmount: return function cleanup() { // code... }; }, []); // componentDidUpdate useEffect(() => { // code... }, [dependencyState, dependencyProp]);
You will see on your console both functions being executed on each state update. First the clean up one, and then the effect callback. If you are using useEffect with some state or prop to do a subscription, every time the dependencies changes, the clean up function will be called, and then the new callback, doing the subscription again, but with the new values.
You should look your app code as the React model simplified:
function EffectExample() { const [count, setCount] = useState(0); useEffect(() => { console.log('effect', count); return () => { console.log('clean up', count); } }, [count]); return ( <button onclick="{()"> setCount((state) => state + 1)}> {count} </button> ) }
If you have a component like this one:
UI = fn(state)
what you really have, when you click on the button and adds 1 to the count, conceptually, is something like this:
function Example() { const [count, setCount] = useState(0); return ( <button onclick="{()"> setCount((state) => state + 1)}> {count} </button> ) }
Each click calls again the fn, with a new state, generating a new version of UI. The state should change by the action of the user or by an async value that should be made with async derivations.
This way you keep the clean idea:
- state transitions make a new fn call
- with the new state, you get the UI description
- if it’s different, update the screen.
A clean and consistent model.
it’s a matter of the renderer to care with adding, updating and removing elements from the screen. At the component level, what matters is:
- if the state changed
- if the app can handle the user actions
- the returned structure in the JSX.
Hooks and its reactive model make React decouple itself from the browser, making the app code care less about in which moment of screen rendering process you are. You don’t force updates and even handle memos by your own rules anymore, it's less direct for the app dev, but more direct in terms of model.
Each re-render generates a structure, React takes care of the rest.
The above is the detailed content of Lifecycle doesnt exist in React with hooks. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!

JavaScriptusestwotypesofcomments:single-line(//)andmulti-line(//).1)Use//forquicknotesorsingle-lineexplanations.2)Use//forlongerexplanationsorcommentingoutblocksofcode.Commentsshouldexplainthe'why',notthe'what',andbeplacedabovetherelevantcodeforclari

The main difference between Python and JavaScript is the type system and application scenarios. 1. Python uses dynamic types, suitable for scientific computing and data analysis. 2. JavaScript adopts weak types and is widely used in front-end and full-stack development. The two have their own advantages in asynchronous programming and performance optimization, and should be decided according to project requirements when choosing.

Whether to choose Python or JavaScript depends on the project type: 1) Choose Python for data science and automation tasks; 2) Choose JavaScript for front-end and full-stack development. Python is favored for its powerful library in data processing and automation, while JavaScript is indispensable for its advantages in web interaction and full-stack development.

Python and JavaScript each have their own advantages, and the choice depends on project needs and personal preferences. 1. Python is easy to learn, with concise syntax, suitable for data science and back-end development, but has a slow execution speed. 2. JavaScript is everywhere in front-end development and has strong asynchronous programming capabilities. Node.js makes it suitable for full-stack development, but the syntax may be complex and error-prone.

JavaScriptisnotbuiltonCorC ;it'saninterpretedlanguagethatrunsonenginesoftenwritteninC .1)JavaScriptwasdesignedasalightweight,interpretedlanguageforwebbrowsers.2)EnginesevolvedfromsimpleinterpreterstoJITcompilers,typicallyinC ,improvingperformance.

JavaScript can be used for front-end and back-end development. The front-end enhances the user experience through DOM operations, and the back-end handles server tasks through Node.js. 1. Front-end example: Change the content of the web page text. 2. Backend example: Create a Node.js server.

Choosing Python or JavaScript should be based on career development, learning curve and ecosystem: 1) Career development: Python is suitable for data science and back-end development, while JavaScript is suitable for front-end and full-stack development. 2) Learning curve: Python syntax is concise and suitable for beginners; JavaScript syntax is flexible. 3) Ecosystem: Python has rich scientific computing libraries, and JavaScript has a powerful front-end framework.

The power of the JavaScript framework lies in simplifying development, improving user experience and application performance. When choosing a framework, consider: 1. Project size and complexity, 2. Team experience, 3. Ecosystem and community support.


Hot AI Tools

Undresser.AI Undress
AI-powered app for creating realistic nude photos

AI Clothes Remover
Online AI tool for removing clothes from photos.

Undress AI Tool
Undress images for free

Clothoff.io
AI clothes remover

Video Face Swap
Swap faces in any video effortlessly with our completely free AI face swap tool!

Hot Article

Hot Tools

VSCode Windows 64-bit Download
A free and powerful IDE editor launched by Microsoft

SAP NetWeaver Server Adapter for Eclipse
Integrate Eclipse with SAP NetWeaver application server.

SecLists
SecLists is the ultimate security tester's companion. It is a collection of various types of lists that are frequently used during security assessments, all in one place. SecLists helps make security testing more efficient and productive by conveniently providing all the lists a security tester might need. List types include usernames, passwords, URLs, fuzzing payloads, sensitive data patterns, web shells, and more. The tester can simply pull this repository onto a new test machine and he will have access to every type of list he needs.

Atom editor mac version download
The most popular open source editor

PhpStorm Mac version
The latest (2018.2.1) professional PHP integrated development tool
