re: You don't have to use Redux VIEW POST

TOP OF THREAD FULL DISCUSSION
re: There are imo very few use cases that require global/shared state. It's not as much about global/shared state, rather more about having state/log...
 

Don’t see how it can be more complex, if the state lives close to where it is used. To me it seems harder once you start adding more indirection.

I think you can have state relatively close to its usage (page container) while remaining flexible to make layout changes. Just need to separate state handling from presentational components. Also it depends, sometimes you have presentational state, that usually lives just fine deeper in the tree.

Making custom hooks or hocs that manage specific state or behavior makes it imo also easier to grasp as it’s more finegrained.

Not trying to suggest to apply chaos theory, structure is important.

I think you can have state relatively close to its usage (page container) while remaining flexible to make layout changes

True! Depending on who you ask, however, "page container" might not be considered "close to its usage". My concern is primarily about sprinkling state around individual components inside the page component tree.

Otherwise I completely agree - keeping state at the top level is conceptually similar to using a state container in that it achieves the same purpose.

“page container” might not be considered “close to its usage”

True in traditional data by props based components, but not when you adopt components by props and children;
See my response at dev.to/patroza/comment/bcnf

code of conduct - report abuse