## Overview
The error messages that say:
> ReactDOM.hydrate is no longer supported in React 18
Don't make sense in the React 19 release. Instead, they should say:
> ReactDOM.hydrate was removed in React 19.
For legacy mode, they should say:
> ReactDOM.hydrate has not been supported since React 18.
This bumps the canary versions to v19 to communicate that the next
release will be a major. Once this lands, we can start merging breaking
changes into `main`.
## Summary
After realizing that this feature flag is entangled with
`alwaysThrottleRetries`, we're going to undo
https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/28550
## How did you test this change?
```
$ yarn test
$ yarn flow dom-browser
$ yarn flow dom-fb
$ yarn flow fabric
```
# Overview
Adds a test to show the combination of the new throttling behavior and
not pre-rendering siblings results in pushing out content that could
have rendered much faster.
- Without the new throttling, the sibling content would render in 30ms.
- Without removing pre-rendering, the sibling content would render in
0ms.
- With both, the sibling content takes 600ms.
## Example
https://github.com/facebook/react/assets/2440089/abd62dc4-93f9-4b7b-a5aa-b795827c1a3a
## Overview
Adds a test to show the cause of an infinite loop in Relay related to
[these effects in
Relay](https://github.com/facebook/relay/blob/448aa67d2a11e7d45cd7b4492b9f599b498cb39e/packages/react-relay/relay-hooks/useLazyLoadQueryNode.js#L77-L104)
and `useModernStrictMode`. The bug is related to effect behavior when
committing trees that re-suspend after initial mount.
With `useModernStrictEffect`, when you:
- initial mount
- update
- suspend (to fallbacks)
- resolve
- re-commit
We fire strict effects during the second mount, like it's a new tree.
This creates weird cases, where if there was an update while we
suspended, we'll first fire only the effects that changed dependencies,
and then fire strict effects.
Creating a test to demonstrate the behavior to see if it's a bug.
While investigating https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/28285 I
found a possible bug in handling Suspense and mismatches. As the tests
show, if the first sibling in a boundary suspends, and the second has a
mismatch, we will NOT show a fallback. If the first sibling is a
mismatch, and the second sibling suspends, we WILL show a fallback.
[Here's a stackbliz showing the behavior on
Canary](https://stackblitz.com/edit/stackblitz-starters-bh3snf?file=src%2Fstyle.css,public%2Findex.html,src%2Findex.tsx).
This breakage was introduced by:
https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/26380. Before this PR, we would
not show a fallback in either case. That PR makes it so that we don't
pre-render siblings of suspended trees, so presumably, whatever
detection we had to avoid fallbacks on mismatches, requires knowing
there's a mismatch in the tree when we suspend.
## Overview
_Depends on https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/28514_
This PR adds a new React hook called `useActionState` to replace and
improve the ReactDOM `useFormState` hook.
## Motivation
This hook intends to fix some of the confusion and limitations of the
`useFormState` hook.
The `useFormState` hook is only exported from the `ReactDOM` package and
implies that it is used only for the state of `<form>` actions, similar
to `useFormStatus` (which is only for `<form>` element status). This
leads to understandable confusion about why `useFormState` does not
provide a `pending` state value like `useFormStatus` does.
The key insight is that the `useFormState` hook does not actually return
the state of any particular form at all. Instead, it returns the state
of the _action_ passed to the hook, wrapping it and returning a
trackable action to add to a form, and returning the last returned value
of the action given. In fact, `useFormState` doesn't need to be used in
a `<form>` at all.
Thus, adding a `pending` value to `useFormState` as-is would thus be
confusing because it would only return the pending state of the _action_
given, not the `<form>` the action is passed to. Even if we wanted to
tie them together, the returned `action` can be passed to multiple
forms, creating confusing and conflicting pending states during multiple
form submissions.
Additionally, since the action is not related to any particular
`<form>`, the hook can be used in any renderer - not only `react-dom`.
For example, React Native could use the hook to wrap an action, pass it
to a component that will unwrap it, and return the form result state and
pending state. It's renderer agnostic.
To fix these issues, this PR:
- Renames `useFormState` to `useActionState`
- Adds a `pending` state to the returned tuple
- Moves the hook to the `'react'` package
## Reference
The `useFormState` hook allows you to track the pending state and return
value of a function (called an "action"). The function passed can be a
plain JavaScript client function, or a bound server action to a
reference on the server. It accepts an optional `initialState` value
used for the initial render, and an optional `permalink` argument for
renderer specific pre-hydration handling (such as a URL to support
progressive hydration in `react-dom`).
Type:
```ts
function useActionState<State>(
action: (state: Awaited<State>) => State | Promise<State>,
initialState: Awaited<State>,
permalink?: string,
): [state: Awaited<State>, dispatch: () => void, boolean];
```
The hook returns a tuple with:
- `state`: the last state the action returned
- `dispatch`: the method to call to dispatch the wrapped action
- `pending`: the pending state of the action and any state updates
contained
Notably, state updates inside of the action dispatched are wrapped in a
transition to keep the page responsive while the action is completing
and the UI is updated based on the result.
## Usage
The `useActionState` hook can be used similar to `useFormState`:
```js
import { useActionState } from "react"; // not react-dom
function Form({ formAction }) {
const [state, action, isPending] = useActionState(formAction);
return (
<form action={action}>
<input type="email" name="email" disabled={isPending} />
<button type="submit" disabled={isPending}>
Submit
</button>
{state.errorMessage && <p>{state.errorMessage}</p>}
</form>
);
}
```
But it doesn't need to be used with a `<form/>` (neither did
`useFormState`, hence the confusion):
```js
import { useActionState, useRef } from "react";
function Form({ someAction }) {
const ref = useRef(null);
const [state, action, isPending] = useActionState(someAction);
async function handleSubmit() {
// See caveats below
await action({ email: ref.current.value });
}
return (
<div>
<input ref={ref} type="email" name="email" disabled={isPending} />
<button onClick={handleSubmit} disabled={isPending}>
Submit
</button>
{state.errorMessage && <p>{state.errorMessage}</p>}
</div>
);
}
```
## Benefits
One of the benefits of using this hook is the automatic tracking of the
return value and pending states of the wrapped function. For example,
the above example could be accomplished via:
```js
import { useActionState, useRef } from "react";
function Form({ someAction }) {
const ref = useRef(null);
const [state, setState] = useState(null);
const [isPending, setIsPending] = useTransition();
function handleSubmit() {
startTransition(async () => {
const response = await someAction({ email: ref.current.value });
setState(response);
});
}
return (
<div>
<input ref={ref} type="email" name="email" disabled={isPending} />
<button onClick={handleSubmit} disabled={isPending}>
Submit
</button>
{state.errorMessage && <p>{state.errorMessage}</p>}
</div>
);
}
```
However, this hook adds more benefits when used with render specific
elements like react-dom `<form>` elements and Server Action. With
`<form>` elements, React will automatically support replay actions on
the form if it is submitted before hydration has completed, providing a
form of partial progressive enhancement: enhancement for when javascript
is enabled but not ready.
Additionally, with the `permalink` argument and Server Actions,
frameworks can provide full progressive enhancement support, submitting
the form to the URL provided along with the FormData from the form. On
submission, the Server Action will be called during the MPA navigation,
similar to any raw HTML app, server rendered, and the result returned to
the client without any JavaScript on the client.
## Caveats
There are a few Caveats to this new hook:
**Additional state update**: Since we cannot know whether you use the
pending state value returned by the hook, the hook will always set the
`isPending` state at the beginning of the first chained action,
resulting in an additional state update similar to `useTransition`. In
the future a type-aware compiler could optimize this for when the
pending state is not accessed.
**Pending state is for the action, not the handler**: The difference is
subtle but important, the pending state begins when the return action is
dispatched and will revert back after all actions and transitions have
settled. The mechanism for this under the hook is the same as
useOptimisitic.
Concretely, what this means is that the pending state of
`useActionState` will not represent any actions or sync work performed
before dispatching the action returned by `useActionState`. Hopefully
this is obvious based on the name and shape of the API, but there may be
some temporary confusion.
As an example, let's take the above example and await another action
inside of it:
```js
import { useActionState, useRef } from "react";
function Form({ someAction, someOtherAction }) {
const ref = useRef(null);
const [state, action, isPending] = useActionState(someAction);
async function handleSubmit() {
await someOtherAction();
// The pending state does not start until this call.
await action({ email: ref.current.value });
}
return (
<div>
<input ref={ref} type="email" name="email" disabled={isPending} />
<button onClick={handleSubmit} disabled={isPending}>
Submit
</button>
{state.errorMessage && <p>{state.errorMessage}</p>}
</div>
);
}
```
Since the pending state is related to the action, and not the handler or
form it's attached to, the pending state only changes when the action is
dispatched. To solve, there are two options.
First (recommended): place the other function call inside of the action
passed to `useActionState`:
```js
import { useActionState, useRef } from "react";
function Form({ someAction, someOtherAction }) {
const ref = useRef(null);
const [state, action, isPending] = useActionState(async (data) => {
// Pending state is true already.
await someOtherAction();
return someAction(data);
});
async function handleSubmit() {
// The pending state starts at this call.
await action({ email: ref.current.value });
}
return (
<div>
<input ref={ref} type="email" name="email" disabled={isPending} />
<button onClick={handleSubmit} disabled={isPending}>
Submit
</button>
{state.errorMessage && <p>{state.errorMessage}</p>}
</div>
);
}
```
For greater control, you can also wrap both in a transition and use the
`isPending` state of the transition:
```js
import { useActionState, useTransition, useRef } from "react";
function Form({ someAction, someOtherAction }) {
const ref = useRef(null);
// isPending is used from the transition wrapping both action calls.
const [isPending, startTransition] = useTransition();
// isPending not used from the individual action.
const [state, action] = useActionState(someAction);
async function handleSubmit() {
startTransition(async () => {
// The transition pending state has begun.
await someOtherAction();
await action({ email: ref.current.value });
});
}
return (
<div>
<input ref={ref} type="email" name="email" disabled={isPending} />
<button onClick={handleSubmit} disabled={isPending}>
Submit
</button>
{state.errorMessage && <p>{state.errorMessage}</p>}
</div>
);
}
```
A similar technique using `useOptimistic` is preferred over using
`useTransition` directly, and is left as an exercise to the reader.
## Thanks
Thanks to @ryanflorence @mjackson @wesbos
(https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/27980#issuecomment-1960685940)
and [Allan
Lasser](https://allanlasser.com/posts/2024-01-26-avoid-using-reacts-useformstatus)
for their feedback and suggestions on `useFormStatus` hook.
The `__NEXT_MAJOR__` value in the RN flags doesn't make sense because:
a) The flags are for the next RN major, since it only impacts the
renderers
b) The flags are off, so they're not currently in the next major, they
need enabled
c) the flag script didn't support it
This PR adds two aliases to the RN file:
- `__TODO_NEXT_RN_MAJOR__`: flags that need enabled before the next RN
major.
- `__NEXT_RN_MAJOR__`: flags that have been enabled since the last RN
major.
These values will need to be manually kept up to date when we cut a RN
version, but once RN switches to the canary build and aligns all the
flags, this entire file can be deleted.
## Script screen
Notably, I added a TODO value and a legend that prints at the end of the
script:
<img width="1078" alt="Screenshot 2024-03-18 at 8 11 27 PM"
src="https://github.com/facebook/react/assets/2440089/14da9066-f77d-437f-8188-830a31a843c5">
Updates the RN flag flow types to work like www does, so we can use the
`.native-fb-dynamic.js` file as the type/shim for the dynamically
imported file.
This a follow up to #28564. It's alternative to #28609 which takes
#28610 into account.
It used to be possible to return JSX from an action with
`useActionState`.
```js
async function action(errors, payload) {
"use server";
try {
...
} catch (x) {
return <div>Error message</div>;
}
}
```
```js
const [errors, formAction] = useActionState(action);
return <div>{errors}</div>;
```
Returning JSX from an action is itself not anything problematic. It's
that it also has to return the previous state to the action reducer
again that's the problem. When this happens we accidentally could
serialize an Element back to the server.
I fixed this in #28564 so it's now blocked if you don't have a temporary
reference set.
However, you can't have that for the progressive enhancement case. The
reply is eagerly encoded as part of the SSR render. Typically you
wouldn't have these in the initial state so the common case is that they
show up after the first POST back that yields an error and it's only in
the no-JS case where this happens so it's hard to discover.
As noted in #28609 there's a security implication with allowing elements
to be sent across this kind of payload, so we can't just make it work.
When an error happens during SSR our general policy is to try to recover
on the client instead. After all, SSR is mainly a perf optimization in
React terms and it's not primarily intended for a no JS solution.
This PR takes the approach that if we fail to generate the progressive
enhancement payload. I.e. if the serialization of previous state /
closures throw. Then we fallback to the replaying semantics just client
actions instead which will succeed.
The effect of this is that this pattern mostly just works:
- First render in the typical case doesn't have any JSX in it so it just
renders a progressive enhanced form.
- If JS fails to hydrate or you click early we do a form POST. If that
hits an error and it tries to render it using JSX, then the new page
will render successfully - however this time with a Replaying form
instead.
- If you try to submit the form again it'll have to be using JS.
Meaning if you use JSX as the error return value of form state and you
make a first attempt that fails, then no JS won't work because either
the first or second attempt has to hydrate.
We have ideas for potentially optimizing away serializing unused
arguments like if you don't actually use previous state which would also
solve it but it wouldn't cover all cases such as if it was deeply nested
in complex state.
Another approach that I considered was to poison the prev state if you
passed an element back but let it through to the action but if you try
to render the poisoned value, it wouldn't work. The downside of this is
when to error. Because in the progressive enhancement case it wouldn't
error early but when you actually try to invoke it at which point it
would be too late to fallback to client replaying. It would probably
have to always error even on the client which is unfortunate since this
mostly just works as long as it hydrates.
As mentioned in #28609 there's a potential security risk if you allow a
passed value to the server to spoof Elements because it allows a hacker
to POST cross origin. This is only an issue if your framework allows
this which it shouldn't but it seems like we should provide an extra
layer of security here.
```js
function action(errors, payload) {
try {
...
} catch (x) {
return [newError].concat(errors);
}
}
```
```js
const [errors, formAction] = useActionState(action);
return <div>{errors}</div>;
```
This would allow you to construct a payload where the previous "errors"
set includes something like `<script src="danger.js" />`.
We could block only elements from being received but it could
potentially be a risk with creating other React types like Context too.
We use symbols as a way to securely brand these.
Most JS don't use this kind of branding with symbols like we do. They're
generally properties which we don't support anyway. However in theory
someone else could be using them like we do. So in an abundance of
carefulness I just ban all symbols from being passed (except by
temporary reference) - not just ours.
This means that the format isn't fully symmetric even beyond just React
Nodes.
#28611 allows code that includes symbols/elements to continue working
but may have to bail out to replaying instead of no JS sometimes.
However, you still can't access the symbols inside the server - they're
by reference only.
Since it was first implemented renderToStaticNodeStream never correctly
set the renderer state to mark the output as static markup which means
it was functionally the same as renderToNodeStream. This change fixes
this oversight. While we are removing renderToNodeStream in a future
version we never did deprecate the static version of this API because it
has no immediate analog in the modern APIs.
- Make all test cases in ReactLazy use RTR with concurrent root
- Except, two cases with "legacy mode" specified in description. These
are moved to a separate description block where the disableLegacyMode
flag is turned off to allow RTR to use legacy root after
https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/28498
If a global error event is dispatched during a test, Jest reports that
test as a failure.
Our `@gate` pragma feature should account for this — if the gate
condition is false, and the global error event is dispatched, then the
test should be reported as a success.
The solution is to install an error event handler right before invoking
the test function. Because we install our own handler, Jest will not
report the test as a failure if a global error event is dispatched; it's
conceptually as if we wrapped the whole test event in a try-catch.
Also apply content hash for experimental files
In #28582 I missed that experimental files have a copy of this build
function setting the version strings.
Currently you can accidentally pass React Element to a Server Action. It
warns but in prod it actually works because we can encode the symbol and
otherwise it's mostly a plain object. It only works if you only pass
host components and no function props etc. which makes it potentially
error later. The first thing this does it just early hard error for
elements.
I made Lazy work by unwrapping though since that will be replaced by
Promises later which works.
Our protocol is not fully symmetric in that elements flow from Server ->
Client. Only the Server can resolve Components and only the client
should really be able to receive host components. It's not intended that
a Server can actually do something with them other than passing them to
the client.
In the case of a Reply, we expect the client to be stateful. It's
waiting for a response. So anything we can't serialize we can still pass
by reference to an in memory object. So I introduce the concept of a
TemporaryReferenceSet which is an opaque object that you create before
encoding the reply. This then stashes any unserializable values in this
set and encode the slot by id. When a new response from the Action then
returns we pass the same temporary set into the parser which can then
restore the objects. This lets you pass a value by reference to the
server and back into another slot.
For example it can be used to render children inside a parent tree from
a server action:
```
export async function Component({ children }) {
"use server";
return <div>{children}</div>;
}
```
(You wouldn't normally do this due to the waterfalls but for advanced
cases.)
A common scenario where this comes up accidentally today is in
`useActionState`.
```
export function action(state, formData) {
"use server";
if (errored) {
return <div>This action <strong>errored</strong></div>;
}
return null;
}
```
```
const [errors, formAction] = useActionState(action);
return <div>{errors}<div>;
```
It feels like I'm just passing the JSX from server to client. However,
because `useActionState` also sends the previous state *back* to the
server this should not actually be valid. Before this PR this actually
worked accidentally. You get a DEV warning but it used to work in prod.
Once you do something like pass a client reference it won't work tho. We
could perhaps make client references work by stashing where we got them
from but it wouldn't work with all possible JSX.
By adding temporary references to the action implementation this will
work again - on the client. It'll also be more efficient since we don't
send back the JSX content that you shouldn't introspect on the server
anyway.
However, a flaw here is that the progressive enhancement of this case
won't work because we can't use temporary references for progressive
enhancement since there's no in memory stash. What is worse is that it
won't error if you hydrate. ~It also will error late in the example
above because the first state is "undefined" so invoking the form once
works - it errors on the second attempt when it tries to send the error
state back again.~ It actually errors on the first invocation because we
need to eagerly serialize "previous state" into the form. So at least
that's better.
I think maybe the solution to this particular pattern would be to allow
JSX to serialize if you have no temporary reference set, and remember
client references so that client references can be returned back to the
server as client references. That way anything you could send from the
server could also be returned to the server. But it would only deopt to
serializing it for progressive enhancement. The consequence of that
would be that there's a lot of JSX that might accidentally seem like it
should work but it's only if you've gotten it from the server before
that it works. This would have to have pair them somehow though since
you can't take a client reference from one implementation of Flight and
use it with another.
With this change, the different files in RN will have *different*
hashes. This replaces the git hash and means that the file content
(including version) is only updated when the rest of the file content
actually changes. This should remove "noop" changes that need to be
synced that only update the version string.
A difference to the www implementation here is (and I'd be looking at
updating www as well if this lands well) that each file has an
individual hash instead of a combined content hash. This further reduces
the number of updated files and I couldn't find a reason we need to have
these in sync. The best I can gather is that this hash is used so folks
don't directly compare version string and make future updates harder.
## Summary
We need to unblock flipping the default for RTR to be concurrent
rendering. Update ReactART-test to use `unstable_isConcurrent` in place.
## How did you test this change?
`yarn test packages/react-art/src/__tests__/ReactART-test.js`
## Summary
Creates a new `alwaysThrottleDisappearingFallbacks` feature flag that
gates the changes from https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/26802
(instead of being controlled by `alwaysThrottleRetries`). The values of
this new flag mirror the current values of `alwaysThrottleRetries` such
that there is no behavior difference.
This additional feature flag allows us to incrementally validate the
change (arguably bug fix) from
https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/26802 independently from
`alwaysThrottleRetries`.
## How did you test this change?
```
$ yarn test
$ yarn flow dom-browser
$ yarn flow dom-fb
$ yarn flow fabric
```
Reverting some of https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/27804 which
renamed this option to stable. This PR just replaces internal usage to
make upcoming PRs cleaner.
Keeping isConcurrent unstable for the next major release in order to
enable a broader deprecation of RTR and be consistent with concurrent
rendering everywhere for next major.
(https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/28498)
- Next major will use concurrent root
- The old behavior (legacy root by default, concurrent root with
unstable option) will be preserved for React Native until new
architecture is fully shipped.
- Flag and legacy root usage can be removed after RN dependency is
unblocked without an additional breaking change
A while back we implemented a heuristic that if a chunk was large it was
assumed to be produced by the render and thus was safe to stream which
results in transferring the underlying object memory. Later we ran into
an issue where a precomputed chunk grew large enough to trigger this
hueristic and it started causing renders to fail because once a second
render had occurred the precomputed chunk would not have an underlying
buffer of bytes to send and these bytes would be omitted from the
stream. We implemented a technique to detect large precomputed chunks
and we enforced that these always be cloned before writing.
Unfortunately our test coverage was not perfect and there has been for a
very long time now a usage pattern where if you complete a boundary in
one flush and then complete a boundary that has stylehsheet dependencies
in another flush you can get a large precomputed chunk that was not
being cloned to be sent twice causing streaming errors.
I've thought about why we even went with this solution in the first
place and I think it was a mistake. It relies on a dev only check to
catch paired with potentially version specific order of operations on
the streaming side. This is too unreliable. Additionally the low limit
of view size for Edge is not used in Node.js but there is not real
justification for this.
In this change I updated the view size for edge streaming to match Node
at 2048 bytes which is still relatively small and we have no data one
way or another to preference 512 over this. Then I updated the assertion
logic to error anytime a precomputed chunk exceeds the size. This
eliminates the need to clone these chunks by just making sure our view
size is always larger than the largest precomputed chunk we can possibly
write. I'm generally in favor of this for a few reasons.
First, we'll always know during testing whether we've violated the limit
as long as we exercise each stream config because the precomputed chunks
are created in module scope. Second, we can always split up large chunks
so making sure the precomptued chunk is smaller than whatever view size
we actually desire is relatively trivial.
Ricky
Sebastian Markbåge
Andrew Clark
Jack Pope
Timothy Yung
Jan Kassens
Ruslan Lesiutin
dependabot[bot]
Sebastian Silbermann
Josh Story
Rom Grk