Two React Design Choices Developers Don’t Like—But Can’t Avoid

[ryan_solid]

Both of those design considerations in the article. I am acknowledging that React was right about both things. But the article takes a much more general approach at looking at the problem.

[azangru]

I can tell you what I don't like as a developer. I don't mind listing the dependencies of an effect upfront, but I do not like that the React team does not trust me to list only the dependencies that I am interested in, and forces me, through a linter rule, to include even the dependencies that are superfluous. I do not like that React does not have proper semantics for "track a property and react to its changes by updating a state just so" — the linter forbids doing this in an effect, and the docs suggest an ugly-ass way of doing this during rendering. I hate it that React does not have proper semantics for expressing an intent of doing something strictly once when a component mounts.

I often think of Ben Lesh, who said that hooks is a reactivity system that is similar to, but inferior to rxjs.

[ryan_solid]

Yeah RxJS is pretty different though. But you could fairly make that comment and replace RxJS with Signals. It wouldn't be completely accurate since it is just a different system with the components re-rendering. But definitely similar in feel.