Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@ryanflorence
Last active October 6, 2016 21:44
Show Gist options
  • Select an option

  • Save ryanflorence/a93fd88d93cbf42d4d24 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.

Select an option

Save ryanflorence/a93fd88d93cbf42d4d24 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
var pureRender = (Component) => {
Object.assign(Component.prototype, {
shouldComponentUpdate (nextProps, nextState) {
return !shallowEqual(this.props, nextProps) ||
!shallowEqual(this.state, nextState);
}
});
};
module.exports = pureRender;
///////////////////////////////////////////////////
var pureRender = require('./pureRender');
class Foo extends React.Component {
render () {
return <div>this ain’t so bad</div>
}
}
pureRender(Foo); // don't return so you know its mutative :(
module.exports = Foo;
@benmosher

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Interesting class-y mixin pattern! but why check shallowEqual(this.state, nextState)?

@dan-codes-16

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@benmosher , how do you know whether props or state is updated? Component should rerender in either case, right?

@RickWong

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Unfortunately this.state of the child becomes meaningless in the above implementation.

If you really want to do this right, you'll need to pass this.setState() as a prop to the child component, and make it use it like this.props.setState() instead of the child's own this.setState().

@ryanflorence

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

j/k this won't work

@ryanflorence

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

updated, I can't think of a very declarative way to do this except to mutate the prototype or inherit :\

@RickWong

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@ryanflorence You can still Object.assign({}, ...) and return a mutated clone.

@aputinski

Copy link
Copy Markdown

How do you feel about this approach?

class Foo extends React.Component {
  constructor(props) {
    super(props);
    this.shouldComponentUpdate = React.addons.PureRenderMixin.shouldComponentUpdate.bind(this);
  }
  render () {
    return <div>Helllo</div>
  }
}

@brigand

brigand commented Mar 30, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@aputinski you get a gold star for simplest possible solution :-)

In any cases that are more complex than a single lifecycle hook, this doesn't work as well.

@RickWong methods on es6 classes aren't enumerable, but you could do Object.assign(Object.create(Foo), {should...})

ghost commented May 3, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Does the latest gist work without any issues? Hard to tell by the comments. :)

@keeth

keeth commented Oct 9, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@aputinski 👍

@captDaylight

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@carlesba

carlesba commented Jan 7, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Won't be easier just extending Component?

class PureRenderComponent extends React.Component {
  shouldComponentUpdate () {
    return React.addons.PureRenderMixin.shouldComponentUpdate.apply(this, arguments)
  }
}

class Foo extends PureRenderComponent {
  render () {
    return (<div>Pure</div>)
  }
}

@alexFaunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Sorry to pile on, but this is one of the top hits when searching for PureRenderMixin in ES6, my two cents:

const pure = function (target) {
  target.prototype.shouldComponentUpdate = React.addons.PureRenderMixin.shouldComponentUpdate;
  return target;
}

@pure
class Test extends React.Component { }

E.g. https://jsbin.com/zayoda/4/edit?js,console,output

@jameswnl

jameswnl commented Apr 26, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Hi, is the code provided by @aputinski still works? I'm using react 15.0.1 and it doesn't work for me.

@yoshi415

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@jameswnl
From official docs:

import PureRenderMixin from 'react-addons-pure-render-mixin';
class FooComponent extends React.Component {
  constructor(props) {
    super(props);
    this.shouldComponentUpdate = PureRenderMixin.shouldComponentUpdate.bind(this);
  }

  render() {
    return <div className={this.props.className}>foo</div>;
  }
}

You need to install the addon as well.

@dlong500

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@brigand
Can you elaborate on your statement "In any cases that are more complex than a single lifecycle hook, this doesn't work as well".

What exactly are the drawbacks to this same approach that is also now listed in the official React docs?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment