The combination of WordPress, React, Gatsby and GraphQL is just that - fun

map, filter and reduce can all operate independently, or be chained together

During each loop of reduce, you can get result of the last loop, and the next element in the array Change the result, then return it for the next loop iteration When you're done, you have the completed collection

This lets you transform each element into something new (or keep it the same) Types don't have to be the same: can return objects, string, numbers - anything!

It loops over the elements, passing each one to a callback function You can return true to include that element in the new array, or false to exclude it

So why are map, filter and reduce useful?

k6 does not run in Node.js because it would perform poorly while running larger tests.Javascript is not generally well suited for high performance. It's a Go program - to achieve maximum performance - embedding a JavaScript runtime for running tests written in JavaScript.

[...nodelist] will make an array of out of an object if the object is iterable. Array.from(nodelist) will make an array out of an object if the object is iterable or if the object is array-like (has .length and numeric props)

scripts are plenty powerful and often easier to live with.

Neutrino only babel-compiles first party source (the JSX -> JS transformation is handled by a babel plugin). It does this because even when using the module entry in package.json, it's expected that the provided file (and it's imports) still be JS and not in some other format - ie: the only difference from the content in main should be that it can use modules syntax (that is import and export rather than require etc).

One thing that matters is if code uses browser-specific (example: Dom) or server-specific (example: filesystem) features.

esnext: source code using stage 4 features (or older), not transpiled, in ES modules. main continues to be used the same way. Its code can be generated from the untranspiled code. Most module use cases should be handleable via esnext. browser can be handled via an extended version of esnext (see next section).

Input: JavaScript with stage 4 features or older, in ES modules. Output: whatever JavaScript runs best on the target platforms.

This is a browser execution environment. It may provide additional built in objects exposed in the global namespace. It is a specialized execution environment which provides builtin capabilities beyond the base javascript language spec.

This is a non-dom based javascript execution environment. It usually only contains the base javascript language spec libraries and objects along with modules to communicate with OS features (available through commonjs require).

The use of a bundler to create a file(s) suitable for running on a client.

It allows the module code (and subsequently dependants on the module) to not use preprocessor hacks, source code changes, or runtime detection hacks to identify which code is appropriate when creating a client bound package.

The browser field is where the module author can hint to the bundler which elements (other modules or source files) need to be replaced when packaging.

When a javascript module is prepared for use on a client there are two major concerns: certain features are already provided by the client, and certain features are not available. Features provided by a client can include http requests, websockets, dom manipulation. Features not available would include tcp sockets, system disk IO.

You can simply prevent a module or file from being loaded into a bundle by specifying a value of false for any of the keys. This is useful if you know certain codepaths will not be executed client side but find it awkward to split up or change the code structure.

Various test runners support using compiled webpack code to drive tests, but may be difficult to integrate with webpack, and Neutrino helps alleviate this

tap

Create and build modern JavaScript applications with zero initial configuration

const setRefs = useRef(new Map()).current; const { children } = props; return ( <div> {React.Children.map(children, child => { return React.cloneElement(child, { // v not innerRef ref: node => { console.log('imHere'); return !node ? setRefs.delete(child.key) : setRefs.set(child.key, node)

Reason compiles to JavaScript thanks to our partner project, BuckleScript, which compiles OCaml/Reason into readable JavaScript with smooth interop. Reason also compiles to fast, barebone assembly, thanks to OCaml itself.

We've worked very hard to make Reason look like JS while preserving OCaml's great semantics & types.

return class extends React.Component {

React guarantees that setState function identity is stable and won’t change on re-renders. This is why it’s safe to omit from the useEffect or useCallback dependency list.

Since the checkbox is rendering an input I would work with it rather than focusing on the image. You could do something like this: const checkbox = getByTestId('checkbox-1234').querySelector('input[type="checkbox"]') expect(checkbox).toHaveProperty('checked', true)

the way Material UI works is it renders a different SVG when the checkbox is clicked, and not changing the attributes or anything on the actual input element. So how do I actually test that the element is checked in line with the react-testing-library philosophy?

Using with is not recommended, and is forbidden in ECMAScript 5 strict mode. The recommended alternative is to assign the object whose properties you want to access to a temporary variable.

I don't recommend unit testing stateful components, or components with side-effects. Write functional tests for those, instead, because you'll need tests which describe the complete end-to-end flow, from user input, to back-end-services, and back to the UI. Those tests frequently duplicate any testing effort you would spend unit-testing stateful UI behaviors. You'd need to do a lot of mocking to properly unit test those kinds of components anyway, and that mocking may cover up problems with too much coupling in your component.

This library is a replacement for Enzyme.

The amount of dev time it saves is uncanny. Like, what used to take 3 hours to write now takes like 30 minutes. No joke.

"Element" SelectorsEach component has a data-reach-* attribute on the underlying DOM element that you can think of as the "element" for the component.

In TypeScript, we can also set a value that a parameter will be assigned if the user does not provide one, or if the user passes undefined in its place.

buildName(undefined, "Adams")

If a default-initialized parameter comes before a required parameter, users need to explicitly pass undefined to get the default initialized value.

There are many strings which I need to convert if not undefined. I could do as follows: { date1: date1 ? formatISODate(date1) : undefined, date2: date2 ? formatISODate(date2) : undefined ...

typeof type guards

Try to avoid mucking with native prototypes, including Array.prototype, if you don't know who will be consuming your code (3rd parties, coworkers, yourself at a later date, etc.). There are ways to safely extend prototypes (but not in all browsers) and there are ways to safely consume objects created from extended prototypes, but a better rule of thumb is to follow the Principle of Least Surprise and avoid these practices altogether.

He's not messing with them he's extending them for Arrays.

There is a new specification which is called a dynamic import for ES modules.

forEach() loop other than by throwing an exception. If you need such behavior, the forEach() method is the wrong tool. Early termination may be accomplished with:

Object.filter = (obj, predicate) => Object.fromEntries(Object.entries(obj).filter(predicate))

Object.fromEntries = arr => Object.assign({}, ...arr.map( ([k, v]) => ({[k]: v}) ));

Using reduce and Object.keys As (1), in combination with Object.assign Using map and spread syntax instead of reduce Using Object.entries and Object.fromEntries

const list = [].concat(x);

The parentheses ( ... ) around the assignment statement are required when using object literal destructuring assignment without a declaration. {a, b} = {a: 1, b: 2} is not valid stand-alone syntax, as the {a, b} on the left-hand side is considered a block and not an object literal.

Your ( ... ) expression needs to be preceded by a semicolon or it may be used to execute a function on the previous line.

({ theme = 'secondary', label = 'Button Text', ...restProps })

props parameters and assign default values directly:

Null Coalescing Operator

@emotion/core

Explore the documentation theme object:

However using the proposed syntax it's easy to see how big components could have logic broken up into smaller reusable pieces, moved into separate files if necessary, leaving you with small, easy-to-understand functions and components.

[a, b, c] = lines[i];

The document object gives access to the page content

“I see. You’ve been starting at AAAAAAA... and working up to ZZZZZZZZ....” “Exactly — though we use a special alphabet of our own. Modifying the electromatic typewriters to deal with this is, of course, trivial. A rather more interesting problem is that of devising suitable circuits to eliminate ridiculous combinations. For example, no letter must occur more than three times in succession.” “Three? Surely you mean two.” “Three is correct: I am afraid it would take too long to explain why, even if you understood our language.”

Javascript

Such behavior means that errors might be visible somewhere in the user interface, or maybe, when some operation is performed on the wrong value, but not at the moment when the real typo occurred.

.

Strings, like all primitives, are immutable. For example concat() doesn’t modify the existing string but creates a new one.

filter() does not mutate the array on which it is called