10 ms·

React v15.6.0 Released

130 points by petercooper 9y ago

ljoshua 9y ago
Downgrading the deprecation warnings to console.warn instead of console.error will be nice until all the third-party libraries catch up with the changes in v15.5. It's the small things.
- BigJono 9y ago
  Using console.error for warnings was silly in the first place. The solution to people ignoring warnings is to change that mindset, not to reduce the granularity of information and make everything red. I see the same thing with ESLint a lot.
  - jankassens 9y ago
    For a long time, console.error had a stack trace in the Chrome devtools while console.warn didn't. I believe this was the main motivation to use console.error.
    - BigJono 9y ago
      Ahhh, that makes a lot more sense!
  - cycomachead 9y ago
    I ran into this a lot with propType validations, which don't seem to be changing. But I'm in the camp that are "warning" should be displayed as a warning, so this is a welcome change. :)
    - Klathmon 9y ago
      Just FYI, propTypes is moved into it's own package and WILL be removed from React-proper soon.
JoshMnem 9y ago
Too bad the PATENTS file is still there.
beefsack 9y ago
This is a very minor release, mainly just covering some bug fixes and deprecation warnings. It's not terribly noteworthy.
- Strom 9y ago
  Some of those IE11 input bugs have been annoying me for a long time. Glad to see them fixed.
usuallybaffled 9y ago
Do they follow semantic versioning? If so, does that mean there have been 15 releases with major breaking changes?
- vizzier 9y ago
  They switched from 0.14 to 15.0 to reflect react being production ready. See here: https://facebook.github.io/react/blog/2016/02/19/new-versioning-scheme.html https://facebook.github.io/react/blog/2016/02/19/new-version...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- AgentME 9y ago
  Something interesting to note: usually code written for one version of React is compatible with the next version of React as long as no deprecated features are used. Usually React's breaking changes between major versions are restricted to breaking deprecated things and making new stuff deprecated.
- Sacho 9y ago
  I think it was open sourced as version 0.8 or something along those lines, so that would be 8 major releases.
pcmaffey 9y ago
I noticed Fiber is now passing all it's tests. Anyone have an idea when release is planned?
- faitswulff 9y ago
  Huh, seems like only yesterday there was a good number of red tests: http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ http://isfiberreadyyet.com/
- felipeko 9y ago
  According to a member of the dev team: 'We are aiming for sometime in the second half of the year. There's still a few details to work out beyond just feature parity with 15. ' https://www.reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/6g3e98/react_fiber_100_of_unit_test_passing_thanks_react/dinq9k3/ https://www.reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/6g3e98/react_fiber...
- davidpelayo 9y ago
  it's awesome the whole refactoring process they have done in such a short period of time. Short, relatively, but short.
grizzles 9y ago
Just curious, what do react folks think about this blog post:http://joonhachu.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/dont-use-flux-or-redux-for-react.html http://joonhachu.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/dont-use-flux-or-re... To me, the application wide bus paradigm is elegant, and find it surprising that redux is currently more fashionable than this approach. Thoughts?
- nemothekid 9y ago
  If your application is small enough where a global event emitter is makes your code clear enough to get the point across and wont make you pull your hair out - I'd argue that React, forget Redux, is probably overkill anyways. There are better frameworks (or just not using one at all), that are more fitted for this and won't have you spending the first 3 hours setting up webpack.
  - sfifs 9y ago
    create-react-app works out of the box for small applications and automatically sets up webpack to sane configurations. I've found that setup ideal for small apps. It's only on the larger apps with more complex customization where I have found the need to use anything other than the default webpack configurations other than the default create-react-app ones.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- acemarke 9y ago
  I'm a Redux maintainer, so I'll address the Redux side of things. The author of that post primarily claims that the main reason to use Redux is about keeping state in sync. That's _a_ reason to use Redux, but not the _only_ reason. Having a single store allows use of a middleware pipeline for centralization of things like logging, API calls, data transformations, and much much more. Having a single state tree and serializable plain object actions allows powerful developer capabilities like time-travel debugging, state persistence, and even synchronization of remote stores via transmitted actions. Use of "pure function" reducers is also key for time-travel debugging, as well as making it straightforward to trace where state changes came from, and are generally easier to test. The author _is_ correct that a centralized store does make encapsulation harder to work with. That's a deliberate tradeoff. (Encapsulation isn't _impossible_ with Redux, but it definitely takes more work.) Dan Abramov's article "You Might Not Need Redux" [0] discusses many of the common complaints about use of Redux, and the tradeoffs that Redux asks for and gives you. Also, my recent two-part post "The Tao of Redux, Part 1 - Implementation and Intent" [1] and "The Tao of Redux, Part 2 - Practice and Philosophy" [2] goes into detail on what actual technical limitations Redux requires and why, why common Redux usage patterns exist, and my opinions on the pros and cons of many "variations" in how Redux _can_ be used. (In particular, it's entirely up to you how much abstraction you apply, how you structure your codebase, and how much "boilerplate" you are comfortable with.) Redux is certainly not the perfect solution for every problem, and it's generally not going to be the solution with the fewest LOC. However, it _is_ a powerful and useful tool for organizing your state and logic, and there _are_ valid reasons why its constraints and common use patterns exist (and complaints about those patterns rarely take those reasons into consideration). [0] https://medium.com/@dan_abramov/you-might-not-need-redux-be46360cf367 https://medium.com/@dan_abramov/you-might-not-need-redux-be4... [1] http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao-of-redux-part-1/ http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao... [2] http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao-of-redux-part-2/ http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao...
chacham15 9y ago
I noticed that fibers tests'[1] are at 100% passing, so I got excited for a second. Looks like this is in preparation of that. [1] http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ http://isfiberreadyyet.com/
amelius 9y ago
Please consider to stop using/contributing to software of companies, if you don't agree with the way they conduct business or treat their users. There are various open-source alternatives to React, which are not encumbered with underlying malpractices such as large-scale user-tracking, data silo lock-in, selling of data to advertisers.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >which are not encumbered with underlying malpractices such as large-scale user-tracking, data silo lock-in, selling of data to advertisers. React is not encumbered by "large-scale user-tracking, data silo lock-in, selling of data to advertisers". Nor it is of any much benefit to Facebook whether devs adopt React or not. In the grand scheme of things, they could not care less. Perhaps you meant for people to stop using Facebook instead?
  - Bahamut 9y ago
    There is a sort of benefit to Facebook - React increases its prestige, which helps recruiting.
    - eugeneionesco 9y ago
      For good reasons, React is a fantastic piece of tech!
      - amelius 9y ago
        Certainly, if you turn a blind eye to the ethical aspects. I'm a bit disappointed here, because on other occasions developers in this community tend to be all in uproar over ethical matters.
        kls 9y ago
        I develop with React but I do not have a Facebook account. I just don't get the uproar about Facebook, if you don't like what they do, you are not forced to use their product. You can choose to engage with a company or not. In my case I choose to engage with them in regards to their development contributions, but absolutely refuse to engage with them as a user. Now don't get me wrong, I find Facebook and particularly Zuckerburg to be detestable, but no one is forcing me to utilize Facebook. I have a free choice to not engage. There has to be some amount of personal responsibility. Now I get that many times, as was the case with Sony, the consumer does not know about misdeeds until after the fact but with Facebook, at this time, their misdeeds are well know. It is my opinion that those who continue to engage with Facebook are OK with Facebook's intrusion into their online affairs and that is fine, they see the value proposition different than I do. What Facebook offers is more valuable to them than their online privacy. When Sony put a root kit on their music CD's and hacked millions of computer and got nothing more than a slap on the wrist, I made the choice to not engage in business with Sony. To this day I have not bought a Sony product, it has been painful at times (my boy wants a Playstation) but I don't have to engage in commerce with them and I won't because I do not agree with their ethics. If they had an opensource project that fit my need I would consider using it, as that is a different kind of engagement with the company. The same goes for a business relationship, I would not preclude Facebook or Sony from places that I would enter into a business relationship with, but they would be on mutually agreed upon terms and if I did not like the ethics of the contract (say I was contracted to develop a rootkit) I have the freedom and personal responsibility to disengage. I think this gets to a deeper issue with society, in that if we don't like something, we are told/trained to whine about it until it changes, but the reality is people like Zuckerburg don't care about whiners and therefor nothing ever changes. Whereas when society valued personal responsibility more, it directly affected companies because people see it as their duty to disengage, which also means taking your money elsewhere. This is something the Zuckerburgs of the world understand. (please don't take this as I said you where whining. that was not the intent)
cutler 9y ago
If you want real state management with immutable data just use Clojurescript and Reagent. Leiningen will also free you from JS tooling hell.
linkmotif 9y ago
What is remarkable is the onChange input event after all these releases is still being improved. This is a testament to how difficult it is to normalize browser differences and not some failing on the part of the React team and contributors. If only people knew how difficult this one little element can be. It's a shame it's so complicated.
minmaxmux 9y ago
Facebook technology have very bad licensing. I do not support it. I would use any other alternative and support small companies instead. RiotJS, VueJS.. better alternatives and better licensing
minmaxmux 9y ago
Minus minus, is that automatic if you dare to criticise facebook ? Do I loose my facebook and instagram now also ?

130 points by petercooper 9y ago

Downgrading the deprecation warnings to console.warn instead of console.error will be nice until all the third-party libraries catch up with the changes in v15.5. It's the small things.

BigJono 9y ago
Using console.error for warnings was silly in the first place. The solution to people ignoring warnings is to change that mindset, not to reduce the granularity of information and make everything red. I see the same thing with ESLint a lot.
- jankassens 9y ago
  For a long time, console.error had a stack trace in the Chrome devtools while console.warn didn't. I believe this was the main motivation to use console.error.
  - BigJono 9y ago
    Ahhh, that makes a lot more sense!
- cycomachead 9y ago
  I ran into this a lot with propType validations, which don't seem to be changing. But I'm in the camp that are "warning" should be displayed as a warning, so this is a welcome change. :)
  - Klathmon 9y ago
    Just FYI, propTypes is moved into it's own package and WILL be removed from React-proper soon.

JoshMnem 9y ago

Too bad the PATENTS file is still there.

beefsack 9y ago

This is a very minor release, mainly just covering some bug fixes and deprecation warnings. It's not terribly noteworthy.

Strom 9y ago
Some of those IE11 input bugs have been annoying me for a long time. Glad to see them fixed.

usuallybaffled 9y ago

Do they follow semantic versioning? If so, does that mean there have been 15 releases with major breaking changes?

vizzier 9y ago
They switched from 0.14 to 15.0 to reflect react being production ready. See here: https://facebook.github.io/react/blog/2016/02/19/new-versioning-scheme.html https://facebook.github.io/react/blog/2016/02/19/new-version...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
AgentME 9y ago
Something interesting to note: usually code written for one version of React is compatible with the next version of React as long as no deprecated features are used. Usually React's breaking changes between major versions are restricted to breaking deprecated things and making new stuff deprecated.
Sacho 9y ago
I think it was open sourced as version 0.8 or something along those lines, so that would be 8 major releases.

pcmaffey 9y ago

I noticed Fiber is now passing all it's tests. Anyone have an idea when release is planned?

faitswulff 9y ago
Huh, seems like only yesterday there was a good number of red tests: http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ http://isfiberreadyyet.com/
felipeko 9y ago
According to a member of the dev team: 'We are aiming for sometime in the second half of the year. There's still a few details to work out beyond just feature parity with 15. ' https://www.reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/6g3e98/react_fiber_100_of_unit_test_passing_thanks_react/dinq9k3/ https://www.reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/6g3e98/react_fiber...
davidpelayo 9y ago
it's awesome the whole refactoring process they have done in such a short period of time. Short, relatively, but short.

grizzles 9y ago

Just curious, what do react folks think about this blog post:http://joonhachu.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/dont-use-flux-or-redux-for-react.html http://joonhachu.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/dont-use-flux-or-re... To me, the application wide bus paradigm is elegant, and find it surprising that redux is currently more fashionable than this approach. Thoughts?

nemothekid 9y ago
If your application is small enough where a global event emitter is makes your code clear enough to get the point across and wont make you pull your hair out - I'd argue that React, forget Redux, is probably overkill anyways. There are better frameworks (or just not using one at all), that are more fitted for this and won't have you spending the first 3 hours setting up webpack.
- sfifs 9y ago
  create-react-app works out of the box for small applications and automatically sets up webpack to sane configurations. I've found that setup ideal for small apps. It's only on the larger apps with more complex customization where I have found the need to use anything other than the default webpack configurations other than the default create-react-app ones.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
acemarke 9y ago
I'm a Redux maintainer, so I'll address the Redux side of things. The author of that post primarily claims that the main reason to use Redux is about keeping state in sync. That's _a_ reason to use Redux, but not the _only_ reason. Having a single store allows use of a middleware pipeline for centralization of things like logging, API calls, data transformations, and much much more. Having a single state tree and serializable plain object actions allows powerful developer capabilities like time-travel debugging, state persistence, and even synchronization of remote stores via transmitted actions. Use of "pure function" reducers is also key for time-travel debugging, as well as making it straightforward to trace where state changes came from, and are generally easier to test. The author _is_ correct that a centralized store does make encapsulation harder to work with. That's a deliberate tradeoff. (Encapsulation isn't _impossible_ with Redux, but it definitely takes more work.) Dan Abramov's article "You Might Not Need Redux" [0] discusses many of the common complaints about use of Redux, and the tradeoffs that Redux asks for and gives you. Also, my recent two-part post "The Tao of Redux, Part 1 - Implementation and Intent" [1] and "The Tao of Redux, Part 2 - Practice and Philosophy" [2] goes into detail on what actual technical limitations Redux requires and why, why common Redux usage patterns exist, and my opinions on the pros and cons of many "variations" in how Redux _can_ be used. (In particular, it's entirely up to you how much abstraction you apply, how you structure your codebase, and how much "boilerplate" you are comfortable with.) Redux is certainly not the perfect solution for every problem, and it's generally not going to be the solution with the fewest LOC. However, it _is_ a powerful and useful tool for organizing your state and logic, and there _are_ valid reasons why its constraints and common use patterns exist (and complaints about those patterns rarely take those reasons into consideration). [0] https://medium.com/@dan_abramov/you-might-not-need-redux-be46360cf367 https://medium.com/@dan_abramov/you-might-not-need-redux-be4... [1] http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao-of-redux-part-1/ http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao... [2] http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao-of-redux-part-2/ http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao...

chacham15 9y ago

I noticed that fibers tests'[1] are at 100% passing, so I got excited for a second. Looks like this is in preparation of that. [1] http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ http://isfiberreadyyet.com/

amelius 9y ago

Please consider to stop using/contributing to software of companies, if you don't agree with the way they conduct business or treat their users. There are various open-source alternatives to React, which are not encumbered with underlying malpractices such as large-scale user-tracking, data silo lock-in, selling of data to advertisers.

coldtea 9y ago
>which are not encumbered with underlying malpractices such as large-scale user-tracking, data silo lock-in, selling of data to advertisers. React is not encumbered by "large-scale user-tracking, data silo lock-in, selling of data to advertisers". Nor it is of any much benefit to Facebook whether devs adopt React or not. In the grand scheme of things, they could not care less. Perhaps you meant for people to stop using Facebook instead?
- Bahamut 9y ago
  There is a sort of benefit to Facebook - React increases its prestige, which helps recruiting.
  - eugeneionesco 9y ago
    For good reasons, React is a fantastic piece of tech!
    - amelius 9y ago
      Certainly, if you turn a blind eye to the ethical aspects. I'm a bit disappointed here, because on other occasions developers in this community tend to be all in uproar over ethical matters.
      - kls 9y ago
        I develop with React but I do not have a Facebook account. I just don't get the uproar about Facebook, if you don't like what they do, you are not forced to use their product. You can choose to engage with a company or not. In my case I choose to engage with them in regards to their development contributions, but absolutely refuse to engage with them as a user. Now don't get me wrong, I find Facebook and particularly Zuckerburg to be detestable, but no one is forcing me to utilize Facebook. I have a free choice to not engage. There has to be some amount of personal responsibility. Now I get that many times, as was the case with Sony, the consumer does not know about misdeeds until after the fact but with Facebook, at this time, their misdeeds are well know. It is my opinion that those who continue to engage with Facebook are OK with Facebook's intrusion into their online affairs and that is fine, they see the value proposition different than I do. What Facebook offers is more valuable to them than their online privacy. When Sony put a root kit on their music CD's and hacked millions of computer and got nothing more than a slap on the wrist, I made the choice to not engage in business with Sony. To this day I have not bought a Sony product, it has been painful at times (my boy wants a Playstation) but I don't have to engage in commerce with them and I won't because I do not agree with their ethics. If they had an opensource project that fit my need I would consider using it, as that is a different kind of engagement with the company. The same goes for a business relationship, I would not preclude Facebook or Sony from places that I would enter into a business relationship with, but they would be on mutually agreed upon terms and if I did not like the ethics of the contract (say I was contracted to develop a rootkit) I have the freedom and personal responsibility to disengage. I think this gets to a deeper issue with society, in that if we don't like something, we are told/trained to whine about it until it changes, but the reality is people like Zuckerburg don't care about whiners and therefor nothing ever changes. Whereas when society valued personal responsibility more, it directly affected companies because people see it as their duty to disengage, which also means taking your money elsewhere. This is something the Zuckerburgs of the world understand. (please don't take this as I said you where whining. that was not the intent)

cutler 9y ago

If you want real state management with immutable data just use Clojurescript and Reagent. Leiningen will also free you from JS tooling hell.

linkmotif 9y ago

What is remarkable is the onChange input event after all these releases is still being improved. This is a testament to how difficult it is to normalize browser differences and not some failing on the part of the React team and contributors. If only people knew how difficult this one little element can be. It's a shame it's so complicated.

minmaxmux 9y ago

Facebook technology have very bad licensing. I do not support it. I would use any other alternative and support small companies instead. RiotJS, VueJS.. better alternatives and better licensing

minmaxmux 9y ago

Minus minus, is that automatic if you dare to criticise facebook ? Do I loose my facebook and instagram now also ?