making error boundary optional or less coupled from suspense #2043
Unanswered
intergalacticspacehighway
asked this question in
Ideas
Replies: 1 comment
-
Seems good to me... I am currently struggling a bit since I have to wrap a lot of mini components with error boundary. I have an HOC for that, but still it's a bit annoying to do everywhere that I am using suspense and that might error. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi there 👋
I want to discuss some use cases where keeping
ErrorBoundary
optional might make sense.Example
As shown below,
B
is usinguseSWR
with suspense enabled,ErrorBoundary
wrappingB
is responsible to catch errors.Simple ErrorBoundary
This usecase makes sense and has no issues.
ErrorBoundary with a retry button
In this example, it becomes a bit of a problem to pass retry functionality to
ErrorBoundary
. We can use global mutate but IMO won't be very neat.ErrorBoundary that shows error message along with previously fetched data.
This becomes a bit inconvenient as the UI is defined in
B
and we need to show data along with an error message.Suggestions
A boolean argument named maybe
errorBoundary
in hook similar tosuspense
.errorBoundary Behaviour
true
orsuspense
istrue
, all errors will be thrown to the error boundary.false
andsuspense
isfalse
, errors are returned as state.false
andsuspense
istrue
, errors are returned as state.References
useErrorBoundary
that can be useful to opt out ofErrorBoundary
.Alternatives
Let me know if it makes sense or if there is a better approach to handle this.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions