Security News
New Python Packaging Proposal Aims to Solve Phantom Dependency Problem with SBOMs
PEP 770 proposes adding SBOM support to Python packages to improve transparency and catch hidden non-Python dependencies that security tools often miss.
const dumb = require('dumb-react')
const Hello = dumb(function Hello(props) {
return (
<div>Hello {props.name}</div>
)
})
// optional step:
Hello.propTypes = { name: React.PropTypes.string.isRequried }
This is intended for building the very simple components that don't need any of those things. You can append them manually if you like, but I'm not sure why you would.
When writing React components you often have sections of the UI that you display
conditionally, or you generate from a list of data. There are a few options on
how to accomplish these. Here's a sample where I chose to create variables in my
render()
export default class Sample extends React.Component {
render() {
const { items, total } = this.props
const itemElements = items.map((item) => {
return (
<li key={item.id}>
{item.name}
</li>
)
})
let moreButton
if (items.length < total) {
moreButton = (
<button onClick={this.onLoadMore.bind(this)}>Load more</button>
)
}
return (
<div>
Results:
<ul>
{itemElements}
</ul>
{moreButton}
</div>
)
}
}
Personally, I don't really like how render
just keeps growing and is doing a
bunch of different things. I have been splitting these into different render
methods in the same component. I have a choice here. I could pass items
and
total
to the functions that need them, or I could just call the functions with
no parameters and let them handle pulling what they need off of this.props
.
export default class Sample extends React.Component {
renderItemElements(items) {
return items.map((item) => {
return (
<li key={item.id}>
{item.name}
</li>
)
})
}
renderMoreButton(items, total) {
if (items.length < total) {
return (
<button onClick={this.onLoadMore.bind(this)}>Load more</button>
)
}
}
render() {
const { items, total } = this.props
return (
<div>
Results:
<ul>
{this.renderItemElements(items)}
</ul>
{this.renderMoreButton(items, total)}
</div>
)
}
}
Those render methods don't really do much. Why not make them their own
components? This is what dumb-react
is for
const ItemElements = dumb(function ItemElements(props) {
return props.items.map((item) => {
return (
<li key={item.id}>
{item.name}
</li>
)
})
})
const MoreButton = dumb(function MoreButton(props) {
if (props.items.length < props.total) {
return (
<button onClick={props.onLoadMore}>Load more</button>
)
}
})
export default class Sample extends React.Component {
render() {
const { items, total } = this.props
return (
<div>
Results:
<ul>
<ItemElements items={items} />
</ul>
<MoreButton
items={items}
total={total}
onLoadMore={this.onLoadMore.bind(this)} />
</div>
)
}
}
FAQs
Creates dumb React components using only a render method
We found that dumb-react demonstrated a not healthy version release cadence and project activity because the last version was released a year ago. It has 1 open source maintainer collaborating on the project.
Did you know?
Socket for GitHub automatically highlights issues in each pull request and monitors the health of all your open source dependencies. Discover the contents of your packages and block harmful activity before you install or update your dependencies.
Security News
PEP 770 proposes adding SBOM support to Python packages to improve transparency and catch hidden non-Python dependencies that security tools often miss.
Security News
Socket CEO Feross Aboukhadijeh discusses open source security challenges, including zero-day attacks and supply chain risks, on the Cyber Security Council podcast.
Security News
Research
Socket researchers uncover how threat actors weaponize Out-of-Band Application Security Testing (OAST) techniques across the npm, PyPI, and RubyGems ecosystems to exfiltrate sensitive data.