Change ReactChildrenMutationWarningHook to Object.freeze children #7455

keyz · 2016-08-10T00:13:20Z

Alternative of #7410 that fixes #7406. This should also fix #7424 and #7426 (the false-positive warning).
Saving and comparing the shadowChildren is pretty expensive -- we can Object.freeze the JSX children instead.

Benchmark:

Comparing master.txt (control) vs freeze.txt (test)
Significant differences marked by ***
% change from control to test, with 99% CIs:

* factory_ms_jsc_jit
    % change:  +0.38% [ -6.59%,  +7.36%]
    means: 27.6427 (control), 27.7558 (test)
* factory_ms_jsc_nojit
    % change: -10.22% [-15.03%,  -5.41%]  ***
    means: 26.3667 (control), 23.6813 (test)
* factory_ms_node
    % change:  -9.60% [-13.73%,  -5.46%]  ***
    means: 98.522 (control), 89.092 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_jsc_jit
    % change:  -8.47% [-11.57%,  -5.37%]  ***
    means: 173.219 (control), 158.576 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_jsc_nojit
    % change: -12.49% [-16.45%,  -8.53%]  ***
    means: 210.597 (control), 184.345 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_node
    % change:  -7.61% [-10.66%,  -4.56%]  ***
    means: 219.05 (control), 202.417 (test)

Reviewers:
@jimfb @vjeux

keyz · 2016-08-10T00:17:26Z

src/isomorphic/classic/element/ReactElement.js

@@ -194,12 +186,28 @@ ReactElement.createElement = function(type, config, children) {
  // the newly allocated props object.
  var childrenLength = arguments.length - 2;
  if (childrenLength === 1) {
-    props.children = children;
+    if (Array.isArray(children)) {
+      let childArray = children.slice(0);


I think it's important that the behavior stays the same across different envs so I call slice here regardless of the environment (prod vs. dev). Without this we won't be able to catch cases like var children = [...]; <Comp children={children}> since we don't want to freeze the original array reference from userland.

cc @sebmarkbage performance?

gaearon · 2016-08-10T18:37:47Z

Is this incremental improvement? If so, can I merge #7410 until this gets reviewed?

jimfb · 2016-08-10T20:47:39Z

src/isomorphic/classic/element/ReactElement.js

  } else if (childrenLength > 1) {
-    var childArray = Array(childrenLength);
+    let childArray = Array(childrenLength);


This can be const, right? The reference identity remains the same.

Oh yeah, good catch!

jimfb · 2016-08-10T20:52:33Z

At a high level, this looks fine to me. I flagged the slice as a performance note for Sebastian. It would suck if we regress the prod build performance because we were trying to improve dev build performance. If Sebastian signs off on the extra allocation/copy, I have no objections to this diff ( 👍 ).

Montana · 2016-08-11T01:07:24Z

So we can't merge #7410?

gaearon · 2016-08-11T10:27:10Z

I already merged #7410 in the meantime but this might be a better solution.

gaearon · 2016-08-11T16:15:27Z

src/renderers/shared/stack/reconciler/__tests__/ReactComponent-test.js

+
+    class Wrapper extends React.Component {
+      componentDidMount() {
+        setTimeout(() => {


Why is setTimeout here necessary?

keyz · 2016-08-14T05:01:15Z

Rebased and updated.
Here's a new benchmark that compares with the current master:

Comparing master.prod.txt (control) vs freeze.prod.txt (test)
Significant differences marked by ***
% change from control to test, with 99% CIs:

* factory_ms_jsc_jit
    % change:  -0.43% [ -5.25%,  +4.39%]
    means: 20.1321 (control), 20.0488 (test)
* factory_ms_jsc_nojit
    % change:  +0.72% [ -4.64%,  +6.08%]
    means: 18.2618 (control), 18.3966 (test)
* factory_ms_node
    % change:  +0.14% [ -2.57%,  +2.85%]
    means: 63.5866 (control), 63.6804 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_jsc_jit
    % change:  +1.98% [ -1.90%,  +5.87%]
    means: 29.2908 (control), 29.8738 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_jsc_nojit
    % change:  -1.68% [ -6.00%,  +2.64%]
    means: 31.9364 (control), 31.4052 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_node
    % change:  -0.21% [ -2.61%,  +2.20%]
    means: 58.2109 (control), 58.0934 (test)

Comparing master.dev.txt (control) vs freeze.dev.txt (test)
Significant differences marked by ***
% change from control to test, with 99% CIs:

* factory_ms_jsc_jit
    % change:  -2.74% [ -7.44%,  +1.97%]
    means: 27.3811 (control), 26.6391 (test)
* factory_ms_jsc_nojit
    % change:  +0.33% [ -4.34%,  +5.00%]
    means: 24.6727 (control), 24.7591 (test)
* factory_ms_node
    % change:  -0.37% [ -2.90%,  +2.17%]
    means: 90.5355 (control), 90.2092 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_jsc_jit
    % change:  -4.46% [ -7.64%,  -1.27%]  ***
    means: 87.2714 (control), 83.392 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_jsc_nojit
    % change:  -5.38% [ -9.78%,  -0.98%]  ***
    means: 93.9902 (control), 88.9515 (test)
* ssr_pe_cold_ms_node
    % change:  -4.82% [ -6.69%,  -2.95%]  ***
    means: 132.504 (control), 126.122 (test)

keyz · 2016-08-30T19:16:21Z

Friendly ping 😀: I just rebased and updated this PR. Do we want to take this approach to fix #7424?

To sum up, it calls .slice() when people explicitly pass an array as children (<Comp children={[...]}/> or <Comp>{[...]}<Comp/>) and freezes the sliced copy, so that we won't accidentally freeze userland data. We call slice in both prod and dev to align their behaviors, which regresses the prod build perf a little bit. A benchmark can be found above.

gaearon · 2016-08-30T19:48:03Z

Can you please help me understand how to read this profiler script output?
I don’t know if + is good or - is good.

gaearon · 2016-08-30T19:50:28Z

src/isomorphic/classic/element/ReactElement.js

  if (childrenLength === 1) {
-    props.children = children;
+    if (Array.isArray(children)) {
+      childArray = children.slice(0);


Does this mean that if we pass them through multiple levels of components, the same array could get slice(0)d many times?

Yes, that's unfortunate. :( Do you think there's a better way to do this?

However, it should be more performant than the current approach, which slices in the ReactElement() function (https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/src/isomorphic/classic/element/ReactElement.js#L138) for every component that has more than one child. The new one slices in createElement and only when an user explicitly passes an array as children. If this makes sense then I guess the question is whether we want to slice in prod.

I’m mostly worried about prod here.
I don’t think we can afford to do more allocations in prod.

keyz · 2016-08-30T19:50:49Z

Yeah, sorry, - is good and + is bad. cc @spicyj

gaearon · 2016-08-30T19:57:41Z

What does the benchmark measure?
Does it include memory usage?

keyz · 2016-08-30T20:06:07Z

No, it only measures time. The percentages (-2.74% [ -7.44%, +1.97%]) are mean, low, and high (https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/scripts/bench/analyze.py#L102-L107).

gaearon · 2016-08-30T20:13:02Z

I don’t think allocating more in production is the way to go here.
I think we should either keep this warning as is, or write a lint rule that warns on

this.props.children.<mutatingMethod>()

or

(var|const|let) <name> = (this.)?props.children;
<name>.{mutatingMethod}()

If this covers most cases and gets included into the default set of eslint-plugin-react, Create React App, and www codebase, we can remove the warning altogether IMO.

sophiebits · 2016-08-30T20:23:35Z

It probably suffices to freeze the array if ReactElement creates it and do nothing otherwise, don't you think?

gaearon · 2016-08-30T20:47:09Z

I’m not sure when people would try to push things into children so hard to say.
Maybe @jimfb can show a few more examples of how people violated this warning in practice.
I thought that pushing things into an array created by map() is one of those use cases.

gaearon · 2016-09-12T19:01:39Z

Could you rebase pls?

- only freeze children array created by createElement

keyz · 2016-09-12T19:22:14Z

Sure, just rebased.

gaearon · 2016-09-13T13:25:37Z

Thanks!

zpao · 2016-09-15T23:13:45Z

FYI: There's no way this is a patch level change - it changes what was a warning to start throwing. Sure, it's dev-only but that's not ok to take in a patch release (we avoid introducing new warnings in patch releases, we definitely can't start throwing).

Let's be a bit more conservative with the semver assignment so we don't sneak breakages in at the wrong time.

just-boris · 2016-09-16T07:05:30Z

@zpao does that mean that there will be 15.4 release soon?

gaearon · 2016-09-16T10:24:37Z

I'll be more conservative, thanks for correcting!

- only freeze children array created by createElement (cherry picked from commit 38c4ade)

ghost added GH Review: review-needed CLA Signed labels Aug 10, 2016

keyz reviewed Aug 10, 2016
View reviewed changes

jimfb reviewed Aug 10, 2016
View reviewed changes

ghost added the CLA Signed label Aug 10, 2016

gaearon reviewed Aug 11, 2016
View reviewed changes

keyz force-pushed the freeze-children branch from 8b89c4a to ac69e95 Compare August 14, 2016 04:27

ghost added the CLA Signed label Aug 14, 2016

This was referenced Aug 14, 2016

use Object.is for checking mutated children #7436

Closed

False-positive mutation warning #7424

Closed

keyz force-pushed the freeze-children branch from ac69e95 to df377b0 Compare August 30, 2016 19:02

ghost added the CLA Signed label Aug 30, 2016

gaearon reviewed Aug 30, 2016
View reviewed changes

ghost added the CLA Signed label Aug 30, 2016

gaearon added GH Review: needs-revision and removed GH Review: review-needed labels Aug 30, 2016

facebook-github-bot added the CLA Signed label Aug 30, 2016

ghost added the CLA Signed label Aug 30, 2016

gaearon self-assigned this Sep 12, 2016

ghost added the CLA Signed label Sep 12, 2016

keyz force-pushed the freeze-children branch 2 times, most recently from b310f7f to 51752fb Compare September 12, 2016 19:17

facebook-github-bot added the CLA Signed label Sep 12, 2016

changed ReactChildrenMutationWarningHook to Object.freeze

470c945

- only freeze children array created by createElement

keyz force-pushed the freeze-children branch from 51752fb to 470c945 Compare September 12, 2016 19:20

ghost added the CLA Signed label Sep 12, 2016

gaearon added GH Review: accepted and removed GH Review: review-needed labels Sep 13, 2016

gaearon added this to the 15-next milestone Sep 13, 2016

gaearon added the Component: Core Utilities label Sep 13, 2016

gaearon merged commit 38c4ade into facebook:master Sep 13, 2016

zpao added semver-minor and removed semver-patch labels Sep 15, 2016

zpao modified the milestones: 15-next, 15.4.0 Oct 4, 2016

zpao pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2016

changed ReactChildrenMutationWarningHook to Object.freeze (#7455)

ec4c0f1

- only freeze children array created by createElement (cherry picked from commit 38c4ade)

pavlin99th mentioned this pull request Nov 16, 2016

Handle NaNs in quadratic example formula #7426

Closed

renovate bot mentioned this pull request Feb 2, 2018

Update dependency react to v0.14.9 - autoclosed signavio/backbone-rel#29

Closed

1 task

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Change ReactChildrenMutationWarningHook to Object.freeze children #7455

Change ReactChildrenMutationWarningHook to Object.freeze children #7455

keyz commented Aug 10, 2016

keyz Aug 10, 2016 •

edited

Loading

jimfb Aug 10, 2016

gaearon commented Aug 10, 2016

jimfb Aug 10, 2016

keyz Aug 10, 2016

jimfb commented Aug 10, 2016

Montana commented Aug 11, 2016

gaearon commented Aug 11, 2016

gaearon Aug 11, 2016

keyz commented Aug 14, 2016

keyz commented Aug 30, 2016 •

edited

Loading

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon Aug 30, 2016

keyz Aug 30, 2016

gaearon Aug 30, 2016

keyz commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

keyz commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

sophiebits commented Aug 30, 2016 •

edited

Loading

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon commented Sep 12, 2016

keyz commented Sep 12, 2016

gaearon commented Sep 13, 2016

zpao commented Sep 15, 2016

just-boris commented Sep 16, 2016

gaearon commented Sep 16, 2016

Change ReactChildrenMutationWarningHook to Object.freeze children #7455

Change ReactChildrenMutationWarningHook to Object.freeze children #7455

Conversation

keyz commented Aug 10, 2016

keyz Aug 10, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jimfb Aug 10, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

gaearon commented Aug 10, 2016

jimfb Aug 10, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

keyz Aug 10, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jimfb commented Aug 10, 2016

Montana commented Aug 11, 2016

gaearon commented Aug 11, 2016

gaearon Aug 11, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

keyz commented Aug 14, 2016

keyz commented Aug 30, 2016 • edited Loading

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon Aug 30, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

keyz Aug 30, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

gaearon Aug 30, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

keyz commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

keyz commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

sophiebits commented Aug 30, 2016 • edited Loading

gaearon commented Aug 30, 2016

gaearon commented Sep 12, 2016

keyz commented Sep 12, 2016

gaearon commented Sep 13, 2016

zpao commented Sep 15, 2016

just-boris commented Sep 16, 2016

gaearon commented Sep 16, 2016

keyz Aug 10, 2016 •

edited

Loading

keyz commented Aug 30, 2016 •

edited

Loading

sophiebits commented Aug 30, 2016 •

edited

Loading