Hi :) Since I got quoted here, I'd like to add some additional, er, "context" to the discussion :)
The big thing here is that Context and Redux are very different tools that solve different problems, with some overlap.
Context is not a "state management" tool. Its only purpose is to make a single value accessible to a nested tree of React components. It's up to you to decide what that value is, and how it's created. Typically, that's done using data from React component state, ie, useState and useReducer. So, you're actually doing all the "state management" yourself - Context just gives you a way to pass it down the tree.
Redux is a library and a pattern for separating your state update logic from the rest of your app, and making it easy to trace when/where/why/how your state has changed. It also gives your whole app the ability to access any piece of state in any component.
So, yes, you can use both of them to pass data down, but they're not the same thing.
I'm so happy to have a Redux maintainer comment here! Thanks for the additional references!
I'm glad somebody really stands out and puts such great resources around Redux and how it should be used.
I'm aware of and agree about the Context camparison - that it's not ok. Context is just a dumb provider of storing data in a React Component that is then passing it to anywhere in a React tree. Now to be fair, Redux is also the kind of library that is letting you do most of the work, and it is just imposing some simple rules.
Probably I did not make this article a lot of justice not stating the many anti-patterns or ugly things that can be created using the Context API - as having the tens or hundreds of context providers in your app :).
Hi :) Since I got quoted here, I'd like to add some additional, er, "context" to the discussion :)
The big thing here is that Context and Redux are very different tools that solve different problems, with some overlap.
Context is not a "state management" tool. Its only purpose is to make a single value accessible to a nested tree of React components. It's up to you to decide what that value is, and how it's created. Typically, that's done using data from React component state, ie, useState and useReducer. So, you're actually doing all the "state management" yourself - Context just gives you a way to pass it down the tree.
Redux is a library and a pattern for separating your state update logic from the rest of your app, and making it easy to trace when/where/why/how your state has changed. It also gives your whole app the ability to access any piece of state in any component.
So, yes, you can use both of them to pass data down, but they're not the same thing.
For more details, see my posts Redux - Not Dead Yet! and React, Redux, and Context Behavior
I'm so happy to have a Redux maintainer comment here! Thanks for the additional references!
I'm glad somebody really stands out and puts such great resources around Redux and how it should be used.
I'm aware of and agree about the Context camparison - that it's not ok. Context is just a dumb provider of storing data in a React Component that is then passing it to anywhere in a React tree. Now to be fair, Redux is also the kind of library that is letting you do most of the work, and it is just imposing some simple rules.
Probably I did not make this article a lot of justice not stating the many anti-patterns or ugly things that can be created using the Context API - as having the tens or hundreds of context providers in your app :).
Wow!!, this is a whole right perspective of why Redux is still important!