[@mantine/hooks] use-throttled-*: Emit updates on trailing edges #6257
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dfaust
force-pushed
the
throttled-hooks-trailing-edge
branch
from
4b32ef8
to
1920554
Compare
dfaust
force-pushed
the
throttled-hooks-trailing-edge
branch
from
1920554
to
c10025e
Compare
|
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Make sure the throttled value/state/callback always has the last value it was called with after the timeout has expired.
I refactored the hooks to all depend on a single hook (
useThrottledCallbackWithClearTimeout) that contains the throttling logic. This hook is not exported.Mantine doesn't use the
react-hooks/exhaustive-depslint. So there is no warning for the missingwaitin the old use-throttled-value implementation. This is why I introduced thewaitRef. I later saw that use-throttled-state and use-throttled-callback did include thewaitdependency. So maybe it was just a mistake. But anyway I kept thewaitReffor now.I also adjusted the tests to reflect the new behavior and unified the "should clear timeout on unmount" tests.
Fixes: #6220