Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Flight / Flight Reply] Encode Iterator separately from Iterable #28854

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 21, 2024

Conversation

sebmarkbage
Copy link
Collaborator

For AsyncIterable we encode AsyncIterator as a separate tag.

Previously we encoded Iterator as just an Array. This adds a special encoding for this. Technically this is a breaking change.

This is kind of an edge case that you'd care about the difference but it becomes more important to treat these correctly for the warnings here #28853.

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot added CLA Signed React Core Team Opened by a member of the React Core Team labels Apr 17, 2024
@@ -1911,7 +1921,13 @@ function renderModelDestructive(

const iteratorFn = getIteratorFn(value);
if (iteratorFn) {
return renderFragment(request, task, Array.from((value: any)));
// TODO: Should we serialize the return value as well like we do for AsyncIterables?
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is kind of annoying because it would require more code. We could potentially just not support it in the AsyncIterable case too.

@react-sizebot
Copy link

The size diff is too large to display in a single comment. The CircleCI job contains an artifact called 'sizebot-message.md' with the full message.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 2f20c26

@sebmarkbage sebmarkbage merged commit bf426f9 into facebook:main Apr 21, 2024
38 checks passed
sebmarkbage added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2024
Stacked on #28853 and #28854.

React supports rendering `Iterable` and will soon support
`AsyncIterable`. As long as it's multi-shot since during an update we
may have to rerender with new inputs an loop over the iterable again.
Therefore the `Iterator` and `AsyncIterator` types are not supported
directly as a child of React - and really it shouldn't pass between
Hooks or components neither for this reason. For parity, that's also the
case when used in Server Components.

However, there is a special case when the component rendered itself is a
generator function. While it returns as a child an `Iterator`, the React
Element itself can act as an `Iterable` because we can re-evaluate the
function to create a new generator whenever we need to.

It's also very convenient to use generator functions over constructing
an `AsyncIterable`. So this is a proposal to special case the
`Generator`/`AsyncGenerator` returned by a (Async) Generator Function.

In Flight this means that when we render a Server Component we can
serialize this value as an `Iterable`/`AsyncIterable` since that's
effectively what rendering it on the server reduces down to. That way if
Fiber can receive the result in any position.

For SuspenseList this would also need another special case because the
children of SuspenseList represent "rows".

`<SuspenseList><Component /></SuspenseList>` currently is a single "row"
even if the component renders multiple children or is an iterator. This
is currently different if Component is a Server Component because it'll
reduce down to an array/AsyncIterable and therefore be treated as one
row per its child. This is different from `<SuspenseList><Component
/><Component /></SuspenseList>` since that has a wrapper array and so
this is always two rows.

It probably makes sense to special case a single-element child in
`SuspenseList` to represent a component that generates rows. That way
you can use an `AsyncGeneratorFunction` to do this.
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2024
Stacked on #28853 and #28854.

React supports rendering `Iterable` and will soon support
`AsyncIterable`. As long as it's multi-shot since during an update we
may have to rerender with new inputs an loop over the iterable again.
Therefore the `Iterator` and `AsyncIterator` types are not supported
directly as a child of React - and really it shouldn't pass between
Hooks or components neither for this reason. For parity, that's also the
case when used in Server Components.

However, there is a special case when the component rendered itself is a
generator function. While it returns as a child an `Iterator`, the React
Element itself can act as an `Iterable` because we can re-evaluate the
function to create a new generator whenever we need to.

It's also very convenient to use generator functions over constructing
an `AsyncIterable`. So this is a proposal to special case the
`Generator`/`AsyncGenerator` returned by a (Async) Generator Function.

In Flight this means that when we render a Server Component we can
serialize this value as an `Iterable`/`AsyncIterable` since that's
effectively what rendering it on the server reduces down to. That way if
Fiber can receive the result in any position.

For SuspenseList this would also need another special case because the
children of SuspenseList represent "rows".

`<SuspenseList><Component /></SuspenseList>` currently is a single "row"
even if the component renders multiple children or is an iterator. This
is currently different if Component is a Server Component because it'll
reduce down to an array/AsyncIterable and therefore be treated as one
row per its child. This is different from `<SuspenseList><Component
/><Component /></SuspenseList>` since that has a wrapper array and so
this is always two rows.

It probably makes sense to special case a single-element child in
`SuspenseList` to represent a component that generates rows. That way
you can use an `AsyncGeneratorFunction` to do this.

DiffTrain build for [5b903cd](5b903cd)
sebmarkbage added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2024
…ent Components (#28868)

Stacked on #28849, #28854, #28853. Behind a flag.

If you're following along from the side-lines. This is probably not what
you think it is.

It's NOT a way to get updates to a component over time. The
AsyncIterable works like an Iterable already works in React which is how
an Array works. I.e. it's a list of children - not the value of a child
over time.

It also doesn't actually render one component at a time. The way it
works is more like awaiting the entire list to become an array and then
it shows up. Before that it suspends the parent.

To actually get these to display one at a time, you have to opt-in with
`<SuspenseList>` to describe how they should appear. That's really the
interesting part and that not implemented yet.

Additionally, since these are effectively Async Functions and uncached
promises, they're not actually fully "supported" on the client yet for
the same reason rendering plain Promises and Async Functions aren't.
They warn. It's only really useful when paired with RSC that produces
instrumented versions of these. Ideally we'd published instrumented
helpers to help with map/filter style operations that yield new
instrumented AsyncIterables.

The way the implementation works basically just relies on unwrapThenable
and otherwise works like a plain Iterator.

There is one quirk with these that are different than just promises. We
ask for a new iterator each time we rerender. This means that upon retry
we kick off another iteration which itself might kick off new requests
that block iterating further. To solve this and make it actually
efficient enough to use on the client we'd need to stash something like
a buffer of the previous iteration and maybe iterator on the iterable so
that we can continue where we left off or synchronously iterate if we've
seen it before. Similar to our `.value` convention on Promises.

In Fizz, I had to do a special case because when we render an iterator
child we don't actually rerender the parent again like we do in Fiber.
However, it's more efficient to just continue on where we left off by
reusing the entries from the thenable state from before in that case.
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2024
…ent Components (#28868)

Stacked on #28849, #28854, #28853. Behind a flag.

If you're following along from the side-lines. This is probably not what
you think it is.

It's NOT a way to get updates to a component over time. The
AsyncIterable works like an Iterable already works in React which is how
an Array works. I.e. it's a list of children - not the value of a child
over time.

It also doesn't actually render one component at a time. The way it
works is more like awaiting the entire list to become an array and then
it shows up. Before that it suspends the parent.

To actually get these to display one at a time, you have to opt-in with
`<SuspenseList>` to describe how they should appear. That's really the
interesting part and that not implemented yet.

Additionally, since these are effectively Async Functions and uncached
promises, they're not actually fully "supported" on the client yet for
the same reason rendering plain Promises and Async Functions aren't.
They warn. It's only really useful when paired with RSC that produces
instrumented versions of these. Ideally we'd published instrumented
helpers to help with map/filter style operations that yield new
instrumented AsyncIterables.

The way the implementation works basically just relies on unwrapThenable
and otherwise works like a plain Iterator.

There is one quirk with these that are different than just promises. We
ask for a new iterator each time we rerender. This means that upon retry
we kick off another iteration which itself might kick off new requests
that block iterating further. To solve this and make it actually
efficient enough to use on the client we'd need to stash something like
a buffer of the previous iteration and maybe iterator on the iterable so
that we can continue where we left off or synchronously iterate if we've
seen it before. Similar to our `.value` convention on Promises.

In Fizz, I had to do a special case because when we render an iterator
child we don't actually rerender the parent again like we do in Fiber.
However, it's more efficient to just continue on where we left off by
reusing the entries from the thenable state from before in that case.

DiffTrain build for commit 9f2eebd.
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2024
…ent Components (#28868)

Stacked on #28849, #28854, #28853. Behind a flag.

If you're following along from the side-lines. This is probably not what
you think it is.

It's NOT a way to get updates to a component over time. The
AsyncIterable works like an Iterable already works in React which is how
an Array works. I.e. it's a list of children - not the value of a child
over time.

It also doesn't actually render one component at a time. The way it
works is more like awaiting the entire list to become an array and then
it shows up. Before that it suspends the parent.

To actually get these to display one at a time, you have to opt-in with
`<SuspenseList>` to describe how they should appear. That's really the
interesting part and that not implemented yet.

Additionally, since these are effectively Async Functions and uncached
promises, they're not actually fully "supported" on the client yet for
the same reason rendering plain Promises and Async Functions aren't.
They warn. It's only really useful when paired with RSC that produces
instrumented versions of these. Ideally we'd published instrumented
helpers to help with map/filter style operations that yield new
instrumented AsyncIterables.

The way the implementation works basically just relies on unwrapThenable
and otherwise works like a plain Iterator.

There is one quirk with these that are different than just promises. We
ask for a new iterator each time we rerender. This means that upon retry
we kick off another iteration which itself might kick off new requests
that block iterating further. To solve this and make it actually
efficient enough to use on the client we'd need to stash something like
a buffer of the previous iteration and maybe iterator on the iterable so
that we can continue where we left off or synchronously iterate if we've
seen it before. Similar to our `.value` convention on Promises.

In Fizz, I had to do a special case because when we render an iterator
child we don't actually rerender the parent again like we do in Fiber.
However, it's more efficient to just continue on where we left off by
reusing the entries from the thenable state from before in that case.

DiffTrain build for [9f2eebd](9f2eebd)
bigfootjon pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2024
…ent Components (#28868)

Stacked on #28849, #28854, #28853. Behind a flag.

If you're following along from the side-lines. This is probably not what
you think it is.

It's NOT a way to get updates to a component over time. The
AsyncIterable works like an Iterable already works in React which is how
an Array works. I.e. it's a list of children - not the value of a child
over time.

It also doesn't actually render one component at a time. The way it
works is more like awaiting the entire list to become an array and then
it shows up. Before that it suspends the parent.

To actually get these to display one at a time, you have to opt-in with
`<SuspenseList>` to describe how they should appear. That's really the
interesting part and that not implemented yet.

Additionally, since these are effectively Async Functions and uncached
promises, they're not actually fully "supported" on the client yet for
the same reason rendering plain Promises and Async Functions aren't.
They warn. It's only really useful when paired with RSC that produces
instrumented versions of these. Ideally we'd published instrumented
helpers to help with map/filter style operations that yield new
instrumented AsyncIterables.

The way the implementation works basically just relies on unwrapThenable
and otherwise works like a plain Iterator.

There is one quirk with these that are different than just promises. We
ask for a new iterator each time we rerender. This means that upon retry
we kick off another iteration which itself might kick off new requests
that block iterating further. To solve this and make it actually
efficient enough to use on the client we'd need to stash something like
a buffer of the previous iteration and maybe iterator on the iterable so
that we can continue where we left off or synchronously iterate if we've
seen it before. Similar to our `.value` convention on Promises.

In Fizz, I had to do a special case because when we render an iterator
child we don't actually rerender the parent again like we do in Fiber.
However, it's more efficient to just continue on where we left off by
reusing the entries from the thenable state from before in that case.

DiffTrain build for commit 9f2eebd.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CLA Signed React Core Team Opened by a member of the React Core Team React 19
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants