Code Monkey home page Code Monkey logo

Comments (12)

cherniavskii avatar cherniavskii commented on September 7, 2024 5

@Janpot What do you think about moving the useStorageStateBrowser hook to @mui/utils?
I think we have many utility hooks we use internally that our users could use.
We can create a separate package and docs for these hooks - e.g. @mui/hooks.

This could also be an initiative under the MUI X product line - @mui/x-hooks with more advanced utility hooks like useStorageStateBrowser, useResizeObserver, useTimeout, useFirstRender, useOnMount, etc.

cc @joserodolfofreitas @oliviertassinari @mui/x

from mui-x.

Janpot avatar Janpot commented on September 7, 2024 2

For inspiration: In Toolpad we wrote a hook that handles initializing state from localstorage on the first render correctly (i.e. doesn't need an effect to run). It also syncs this state across tabs.

from mui-x.

Janpot avatar Janpot commented on September 7, 2024 1

Yes, I'll clean it up a bit and move to @mui/utils 👍

from mui-x.

Janpot avatar Janpot commented on September 7, 2024 1

To be noted that @mui/utils is a "private" npm package. Only MUI System and Base UI are supposed to import from it. This package exists so that MUI System doesn't have a dependency on Base UI but still able to use some of its logic to create components.

Just to note that this example is promoting @mui/utils as a public package. (This is why we have it as a dependency in Toolpad, I never knew it wasn't meant to be public)

Other places where @mui/utils seems to be endorsed in the docs as a public package:

IMO, the @mui/utils package is already de facto public. It would make more sense to mark everything in the package as unstable_ to signal to consumers that it's not following semver guarantees. It's more effective than documenting it in the docs or README, at least you notice it when vscode autoimports something from the @mui/utils package.

from mui-x.

romgrk avatar romgrk commented on September 7, 2024 1

I don't think making it public is a good idea. The code in there is internal code that we need to share across our packages/repos, not code we want the public to consume. I think we should either clearly mark it as a private package or create a new one with a name like @mui/internals. Then there is no issue with removing the unstable_ prefix and making breaking changes to the code, because it's an internal-only package. There is also nothing that prevents us from uncoupling the version number from the core's versionning scheme if we introduce breaking changes.

What would prevent us from following semver?

Nothing prevents us, it just adds overhead. It needs to be properly maintained, backwards compatibility needs to be guaranteed more tightly, and it needs to be documented.

I don't think semver implies we need to do all that. If it's an internal package we can have a meaningful (semver) version number while also not documenting it. Following semver doesn't imply we make the package public. We could also just leave it at version 0.x, which semver defines as basically "do anything you want" (point 4 of semver).

from mui-x.

oliviertassinari avatar oliviertassinari commented on September 7, 2024 1

Other places where @mui/utils seems to be endorsed in the docs as a public package:

@Janpot Yes, it's not great, this work was never prioritized.

The shaping page that centralizes the discussions on this topic: https://www.notion.so/mui-org/mui-utils-purpose-9a9fc9da3a004864b6c4e1f4d1f24f95.

from mui-x.

Janpot avatar Janpot commented on September 7, 2024 1

I ported the hook to @mui/utils. For now with the purpose to only use it internally. If anyone has objections to this, please comment on the PR.

To build save/store grid state on top of this, it will need to be wrapped with parsing/serialization/validation logic. The hook doesn't mean to be opinionated about parsing, error handling and migrating stored values.

from mui-x.

oliviertassinari avatar oliviertassinari commented on September 7, 2024

To be noted that @mui/utils is a "private" npm package. Only MUI System and Base UI are supposed to import from it.

This package exists so that MUI System doesn't have a dependency on Base UI (would be weird, and isolate download npm stats) but still able to use some of its logic to create components.

from mui-x.

flaviendelangle avatar flaviendelangle commented on September 7, 2024

We did not close the discussion about MUI X using it

from mui-x.

michelengelen avatar michelengelen commented on September 7, 2024

To be noted that @mui/utils is a "private" npm package. Only MUI System and Base UI are supposed to import from it. This package exists so that MUI System doesn't have a dependency on Base UI but still able to use some of its logic to create components.

Just to note that this example is promoting @mui/utils as a public package. (This is why we have it as a dependency in Toolpad, I never knew it wasn't meant to be public)

Other places where @mui/utils seems to be endorsed in the docs as a public package:

IMO, the @mui/utils package is already de facto public. It would make more sense to mark everything in the package as unstable_ to signal to consumers that it's not following semver guarantees. It's more effective than documenting it in the docs or README, at least you notice it when vscode autoimports something from the @mui/utils package.

What would prevent us from following semver? Couldn't we make this public and follow best practices as well?

from mui-x.

Janpot avatar Janpot commented on September 7, 2024

What would prevent us from following semver?

Nothing prevents us, it just adds overhead. It needs to be properly maintained, backwards compatibility needs to be guaranteed more tightly, and it needs to be documented.

edit: To be clear, I interpreted the question as "what prevents us from treating @mui/utils as an officially supported MUI product?".

from mui-x.

DanailH avatar DanailH commented on September 7, 2024

I think we should either clearly mark it as a private package or create a new one with a name like @mui/internals.

@romgrk this makes sense to me. Essentially have 2 packages,@mui/internals which is mostly what is currently in the utils, and @mui/utils which is public and contains things like useStorageStateBrowser from Toolpad. I can see us adding more relevant utils for our users there, we are probably going to encounter some cases when we ship the data grid server-side integration (transformers, adaptors, etc.)

from mui-x.

Related Issues (20)

Recommend Projects

  • React photo React

    A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.

  • Vue.js photo Vue.js

    🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.

  • Typescript photo Typescript

    TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.

  • TensorFlow photo TensorFlow

    An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone

  • Django photo Django

    The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

  • D3 photo D3

    Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉

Recommend Topics

  • javascript

    JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.

  • web

    Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.

  • server

    A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.

  • Machine learning

    Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.

  • Game

    Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.

Recommend Org

  • Facebook photo Facebook

    We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.

  • Microsoft photo Microsoft

    Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.

  • Google photo Google

    Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.

  • D3 photo D3

    Data-Driven Documents codes.