> But hooks need to be named "useX" No they don't, that's a suggested convention > have restrictions on where to be called (that a program detects) Yes, it i

> But hooks need to be named "useX" No they don't, that's a suggested convention > have restrictions on where to be called (that a program detects) Yes, it is strange that they opted for this implicit approach, but this is the nature of interacting with a scheduling algorithm in real-time; it is with limitations I agree they are clearly not unrestricted free-use JS, but they aren't a custom DSL hydrated by compile-time craziness, they are hooks into a scheduling algorithm to help you maintain consistent state in a giant tree. I'm not sure how that is ever going to be free. Perhaps a better type system can help but this is fundamentally complex