Develop Reference

useEffect execution order between sibling components

In this code:
import React from 'react';
import './style.css';
let Child2 = () => {
React.useEffect(() => {
console.log('Child 2');
}, []);
return <div />;
};
let Child1 = ({ children }) => {
return <div>{children}</div>;
};
let FirstComponent = () => {
React.useEffect(() => {
console.log('FirstComponent');
}, []);
return <div />;
};
export default function App() {
React.useEffect(() => {
console.log('Main App');
}, []);
return (
<div>
<FirstComponent />
<Child1>
<Child2 />
</Child1>
</div>
);
}
The output is:
FirstComponent
Child 2
Main App
Question
Is there some reliable source (e.g. docs) so that we can say that always useEffect of
FirstComponent will precede useEffect of Child2?
Why is this relevant?
If we are sure that effect from FirstComponent always runs first, then it could be useful to perform some initialization work there (maybe perform some side effect), which we want to be available to all other useEffects in the app. We can't do this with normal parent/child effects, because you can see that parent effect ("Main App") runs after child effect ("Child 2").

Answering the question asked: As far as I'm aware, React doesn't guarantee the order of the calls to your component functions for the children, though it would be really surprising if they weren't in first-to-last order between siblings (so, reliably calling FirstComponent at least once before calling Child1 the first time, in that App). But although the calls to createElement will reliably be in that order, the calls to the component functions are done by React when and how it sees fit. It's hard to prove a negative, but I don't think it's documented that they'll be in any particular order.
But:
If we are sure that effect from FirstComponent always runs first, then it could be useful to perform some initialization work there, which we want to be available to all other useEffects in the app. We can't do this with normal parent/child effects, because you can see that parent effect ("Main App") runs after child effect ("Child 2".)
I wouldn't do that even if you find documentation saying the order is guaranteed. Crosstalk between sibling components is not a good idea. It means the components can't be used separately from each other, makes the components harder to test, and is unusual, making it surprising to people maintaining the codebase. You can do it anyway, of course, but as is often the case, lifting state up most likely applies ("state" in the general case, not just component state). Instead, do any one-time initialization you need to do in the parent (App) — not as an effect, but as component state in the parent, or instance state stored in a ref, etc., and pass it to the children via props, context, a Redux store, etc.
In the below, I'll pass things to the children via props, but that's just for the purposes of an example.
State
The usual place to store information used by child elements is in the parent's state. useState supports a callback function that will only be called during initialization. That's where to put this sort of thing unless you have a good reason not to. In the comments, you've suggested you have a good reason not to, but I'd be remiss if I didn't mention it in an answer meant for others in the future, not just for you now.
(This example and the second one below pass the information to the children via props, but again, it could be props, context, a Redux store, etc.)
Example:
const { useState, useEffect } = React;
let Child2 = () => {
return <div>Child 2</div>;
};
let Child1 = ({ value, children }) => {
return (
<div>
<div>value = {value}</div>
{children}
</div>
);
};
let FirstComponent = ({ value }) => {
return <div>value = {value}</div>;
};
function App() {
const [value] = useState(() => {
// Do one-time initialization here (pretend this is an
// expensive operation).
console.log("Doing initialization");
return Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000);
});
useEffect(() => {
return () => {
// This is called on unmount, clean-up here if necessary
console.log("Doing cleanup");
};
}, []);
return (
<div>
<FirstComponent value={value} />
<Child1 value={value}>
<Child2 />
</Child1>
</div>
);
}
const root = ReactDOM.createRoot(document.getElementById("root"));
root.render(<App />);
<div id="root"></div>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/18.1.0/umd/react.development.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/18.1.0/umd/react-dom.development.js"></script>
Technically, I suppose you could use it for doing something that didn't result in any value at all, but that would be odd semantically and I don't think I'd recommend it.
Non-State
If it's information that can't be stored in state for some reason, you can use a ref, either to store it (although then you might prefer state) or to just store a flag saying "I've done my initialization." One-time initialization of refs is perfectly normal. And if the initialization requires cleanup, you can do that in a useEffect cleanup callback. Here's an example (this example does end up storing something other than a flag on the ref, but it could just be a flag):
const { useRef, useEffect } = React;
let Child2 = () => {
return <div>Child 2</div>;
};
let Child1 = ({ value, children }) => {
return (
<div>
<div>value = {value}</div>
{children}
</div>
);
};
let FirstComponent = ({ value }) => {
return <div>value = {value}</div>;
};
function App() {
// NOTE: This code isn't using state because the OP has a reason
// for not using state, which happens sometimes. But without
// such a reason, the normal thing to do here would be to use state,
// perhaps `useState` with a callback function to do it once
const instance = useRef(null);
if (!instance.current) {
// Do one-time initialization here, save the results
// in `instance.current`:
console.log("Doing initialization");
instance.current = {
value: Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000),
};
}
const { value } = instance.current;
useEffect(() => {
return () => {
// This is called on unmount, clean-up here if necessary
console.log("Doing cleanup");
};
}, []);
return (
<div>
<FirstComponent value={value} />
<Child1 value={value}>
<Child2 />
</Child1>
</div>
);
}
const root = ReactDOM.createRoot(document.getElementById("root"));
root.render(<App />);
<div id="root"></div>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/18.1.0/umd/react.development.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/18.1.0/umd/react-dom.development.js"></script>
Your specific example use case
Re the specific use case you linked (note: the code from the question may not be correct; I'm not trying to correct it here, not least because I don't use axios):
I am using an axios interceptor to handle errors globally, but would like to set the state of my app from the interceptor.
axios.interceptors.response.use(
error => {
AppState.setError(error)
}
)
(And you've indicated that AppState, whatever it is, is only accessible within App.)
I'm not a fan of modifying the global axios instance, it's another crosstalky thing that affects all code using axios in the page/app, regardless of whether it's your code or code in a library that may use axios in a way where it's not appropriate for your app to show an error state that occurs.
I'd lean toward decoupling the interceptor from the App state update:
Have an axios wrapper module taht exports a custom axios instance
Put the interceptor on that instance
Provide a means of subscribing to error events from that module
Have App subscribe to the error event from that to set its state (and unsubscribe on unmount)
That sounds complicated, but it's only about 30 lines of code even if you don't have a prebuilt event emitter class:
import globalAxios from "axios";
const errorListeners = new Set();
export function errorSubscribe(fn) {
errorListeners.add(fn);
}
export function errorUnsubscribe(fn) {
errorListeners.delete(fn);
}
function useErrorListener(fn) {
const subscribed = useRef(false);
if (!subscribed.current) {
subscribed.current = true;
errorSubscribe(fn);
}
useEffect(() => {
return () => errorUnsubscribe(fn);
}, []);
}
export const axios = globalAxios.create({/*...config...*/});
instance.interceptors.response.use(() => {
(error) => {
for (const listener of errorListeners) {
try { listener(error); } catch {}
}
};
});
Then in App:
import { axios, useErrorListener } from "./axios-wrapper";
function App() {
useErrorListener((error) => AppState.setError(error));
// ...
}
In code that needs to use that instance of axios:
import { axios } from "./axios-wrapper";
// ...
That's a bit barebones (it assumes you'd never have dependencies on the error callback function, for instance), but you get the idea.

I second to #T.J. Crowder, you should not rely on execution order of components to implement any feature. For reasons:
What you want to achieve is anti-pattern, implicit dependency that surprises ppl. JUST DON'T DO IT.
It's not very reliable after all. The execution order is maintained, but continuity is not guaranteed.
I'll complement his answer with some details on execution order of React components.
So for a simple case of:
function A() {
return (<>
<B />
<C>
<D />
</C>
</>
);
}
The rule of thumb to determine component execution order, is to think in terms of JSX element creation call. In our case it'll be A(B(), C(D())), Same as JS function execution order, the execution (or "render") order of components would be B, D, C, A.
But this comes with caveats:
If any component bails out, e.g., D is a React.memo'ed "pure" component and its props doesn't change, then order would be B, C, A, order is maintained, but bailout component is skipped.
Not-so-everyday exception like SuspenseList (experimental)
<SuspenseList> coordinates the “reveal order” of the closest <Suspense> nodes below it.
which of cause affects execution order of its children by design.
In concurrent mode, because rendering can be interrupted at React's discretion, the continuity of execution order is in question. Sth like B, D, B, D, C, A could happen. (That said, useEffect seems unaffected AFAICT cus it's invoked in commit phase)

React useState is called multiple times [duplicate]

I don't know why my React component is rendering twice. So I am pulling a phone number from params and saving it to state so I can search through Firestore. Everything seems to be working fine except it renders twice... The first one renders the phone number and zero points. The second time it renders all the data is displayed correctly. Can someone guide me to the solution.
class Update extends Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
const { match } = this.props;
this.state = {
phoneNumber: match.params.phoneNumber,
points: 0,
error: ''
}
}
getPoints = () => {
firebase.auth().onAuthStateChanged((user) => {
if(user) {
const docRef = database.collection('users').doc(user.uid).collection('customers').doc(this.state.phoneNumber);
docRef.get().then((doc) => {
if (doc.exists) {
const points = doc.data().points;
this.setState(() => ({ points }));
console.log(points);
} else {
// doc.data() will be undefined in this case
console.log("No such document!");
const error = 'This phone number is not registered yet...'
this.setState(() => ({ error }));
}
}).catch(function(error) {
console.log("Error getting document:", error);
});
} else {
history.push('/')
}
});
}
componentDidMount() {
if(this.state.phoneNumber) {
this.getPoints();
} else {
return null;
}
}
render() {
return (
<div>
<div>
<p>{this.state.phoneNumber} has {this.state.points} points...</p>
<p>Would you like to redeem or add points?</p>
</div>
<div>
<button>Redeem Points</button>
<button>Add Points</button>
</div>
</div>
);
}
}
export default Update;

You are running your app in strict mode. Go to index.js and comment strict mode tag. You will find a single render.
This happens is an intentional feature of the React.StrictMode. It only happens in development mode and should help to find accidental side effects in the render phase.
From the docs:
Strict mode can’t automatically detect side effects for you, but it can help you spot them by making them a little more deterministic. This is done by intentionally double-invoking the following functions:...
^ In this case the render function.
Official documentation of what might cause re-rendering when using React.StrictMode:
https://reactjs.org/docs/strict-mode.html#detecting-unexpected-side-effects

This is because of React Strict Mode code.
Remove -> React.StrictMode, from ReactDOM.render code.
Will render 2 times on every re-render:
ReactDOM.render(
<React.StrictMode>
<App />
</React.StrictMode>,
document.getElementById('root')
);
Will render 1 time:
ReactDOM.render(
<>
<App />
</>,
document.getElementById('root')
);

React is rendering the component before getPoints finishing the asynchronous operation.
So the first render shows the initial state for points which is 0, then componentDidMount is called and triggers the async operation.
When the async operation is done and the state been updated, another render is triggered with the new data.
If you want, you can show a loader or an indicator that the data is being fetched and is not ready yet to display with conditional rendering.
Just add another Boolean key like isFetching, set it to true when you call the server and set it to false when the data is received.
Your render can look something like this:
render() {
const { isFetching } = this.state;
return (
<div>
{isFetching ? (
<div>Loading...</div>
) : (
<div>
<p>
{this.state.phoneNumber} has {this.state.points} points...
</p>
<p>Would you like to redeem or add points?</p>
<div>
<button>Redeem Points</button>
<button>Add Points</button>
</div>
</div>
)}
</div>
);
}

React.StrictMode, makes it render twice, so that we do not put side effects in following locations
constructor
componentWillMount (or UNSAFE_componentWillMount)
componentWillReceiveProps (or UNSAFE_componentWillReceiveProps)
componentWillUpdate (or UNSAFE_componentWillUpdate)
getDerivedStateFromProps
shouldComponentUpdate
render
setState updater functions (the first argument)
All these methods are called more than once, so it is important to avoid having side-effects in them. If we ignore this principle it is likely to end up with inconsistent state issues and memory leaks.
React.StrictMode cannot spot side-effects at once, but it can help us find them by intentionally invoking twice some key functions.
These functions are:
Class component constructor, render, and shouldComponentUpdate methods
Class component static getDerivedStateFromProps method
Function component bodies
State updater functions (the first argument to setState)
Functions passed to useState, useMemo, or useReducer
This behaviour definitely has some performance impact, but we should not worry since it takes place only in development and not in production.
credit: https://mariosfakiolas.com/blog/my-react-components-render-twice-and-drive-me-crazy/

it is done intentionally by react to avoid this
remove
<React.StrictMode> </React.StrictMode>
from index.js

I worked around this by providing a custom hook. Put the hook below into your code, then:
// instead of this:
useEffect( ()=> {
console.log('my effect is running');
return () => console.log('my effect is destroying');
}, []);
// do this:
useEffectOnce( ()=> {
console.log('my effect is running');
return () => console.log('my effect is destroying');
});
Here is the code for the hook:
export const useEffectOnce = ( effect => {
const destroyFunc = useRef();
const calledOnce = useRef(false);
const renderAfterCalled = useRef(false);
if (calledOnce.current) {
renderAfterCalled.current = true;
}
useEffect( () => {
if (calledOnce.current) {
return;
}
calledOnce.current = true;
destroyFunc.current = effect();
return ()=> {
if (!renderAfterCalled.current) {
return;
}
if (destroyFunc.current) {
destroyFunc.current();
}
};
}, []);
};
See this blog for the explanation.

Well, I have created a workaround hook for this. Check this, if it helps:
import { useEffect } from "react";
const useDevEffect = (cb, deps) => {
let ran = false;
useEffect(() => {
if (ran) return;
cb();
return () => (ran = true);
}, deps);
};
const isDev = !process.env.NODE_ENV || process.env.NODE_ENV === "development";
export const useOnceEffect = isDev ? useDevEffect : useEffect;
CodeSandbox Demo: https://github.com/akulsr0/react-18-useeffect-twice-fix

React internally monitors & manages its render cycles using its virtual dom and its diffing algorithms, so you need not worry about the number of re-renders. Let the re-renders to be managed by react. Even though the render function is getting invoked, there are sub components which doesn't gets refreshed on ui, if there is no props or state change inside it. Every setstate function call will inform react to check the diffing algorithm, and invoke the render function.
So in your case, since you have a setstate defined inside the getPoints function, it tells react to rerun the diffing process through the render function.

Why does useEffect trigger in first time render even though i gave it dependency arrays? [duplicate]

With React's new Effect Hooks, I can tell React to skip applying an effect if certain values haven't changed between re-renders - Example from React's docs:
useEffect(() => {
document.title = `You clicked ${count} times`;
}, [count]); // Only re-run the effect if count changes
But the example above applies the effect upon initial render, and upon subsequent re-renders where count has changed. How can I tell React to skip the effect on the initial render?

As the guide states,
The Effect Hook, useEffect, adds the ability to perform side effects from a function component. It serves the same purpose as componentDidMount, componentDidUpdate, and componentWillUnmount in React classes, but unified into a single API.
In this example from the guide it's expected that count is 0 only on initial render:
const [count, setCount] = useState(0);
So it will work as componentDidUpdate with additional check:
useEffect(() => {
if (count)
document.title = `You clicked ${count} times`;
}, [count]);
This is basically how custom hook that can be used instead of useEffect may work:
function useDidUpdateEffect(fn, inputs) {
const didMountRef = useRef(false);
useEffect(() => {
if (didMountRef.current) {
return fn();
}
didMountRef.current = true;
}, inputs);
}
Credits go to #Tholle for suggesting useRef instead of setState.

Here's a custom hook that just provides a boolean flag to indicate whether the current render is the first render (when the component was mounted). It's about the same as some of the other answers but you can use the flag in a useEffect or the render function or anywhere else in the component you want. Maybe someone can propose a better name.
import { useRef, useEffect } from 'react';
export const useIsMount = () => {
const isMountRef = useRef(true);
useEffect(() => {
isMountRef.current = false;
}, []);
return isMountRef.current;
};
You can use it like:
import React, { useEffect } from 'react';
import { useIsMount } from './useIsMount';
const MyComponent = () => {
const isMount = useIsMount();
useEffect(() => {
if (isMount) {
console.log('First Render');
} else {
console.log('Subsequent Render');
}
});
return isMount ? <p>First Render</p> : <p>Subsequent Render</p>;
};
And here's a test for it if you're interested:
import { renderHook } from '#testing-library/react-hooks';
import { useIsMount } from '../useIsMount';
describe('useIsMount', () => {
it('should be true on first render and false after', () => {
const { result, rerender } = renderHook(() => useIsMount());
expect(result.current).toEqual(true);
rerender();
expect(result.current).toEqual(false);
rerender();
expect(result.current).toEqual(false);
});
});
Our use case was to hide animated elements if the initial props indicate they should be hidden. On later renders if the props changed, we did want the elements to animate out.

I found a solution that is more simple and has no need to use another hook, but it has drawbacks.
useEffect(() => {
// skip initial render
return () => {
// do something with dependency
}
}, [dependency])
This is just an example that there are others ways of doing it if your case is very simple.
The drawback of doing this is that you can't have a cleanup effect and will only execute when the dependency array changes the second time.
This isn't recommended to use and you should use what the other answers are saying, but I only added this here so people know that there is more than one way of doing this.
Edit:
Just to make it more clear, you shouldn't use this approach to solving the problem in the question (skipping the initial render), this is only for teaching purpose that shows you can do the same thing in different ways.
If you need to skip the initial render, please use the approach on other answers.

I use a regular state variable instead of a ref.
// Initializing didMount as false
const [didMount, setDidMount] = useState(false)
// Setting didMount to true upon mounting
useEffect(() => { setDidMount(true) }, [])
// Now that we have a variable that tells us wether or not the component has
// mounted we can change the behavior of the other effect based on that
const [count, setCount] = useState(0)
useEffect(() => {
if (didMount) document.title = `You clicked ${count} times`
}, [count])
We can refactor the didMount logic as a custom hook like this.
function useDidMount() {
const [didMount, setDidMount] = useState(false)
useEffect(() => { setDidMount(true) }, [])
return didMount
}
Finally, we can use it in our component like this.
const didMount = useDidMount()
const [count, setCount] = useState(0)
useEffect(() => {
if (didMount) document.title = `You clicked ${count} times`
}, [count])
UPDATE Using useRef hook to avoid the extra rerender (Thanks to #TomEsterez for the suggestion)
This time our custom hook returns a function returning our ref's current value. U can use the ref directly too, but I like this better.
function useDidMount() {
const mountRef = useRef(false);
useEffect(() => { mountRef.current = true }, []);
return () => mountRef.current;
}
Usage
const MyComponent = () => {
const didMount = useDidMount();
useEffect(() => {
if (didMount()) // do something
else // do something else
})
return (
<div>something</div>
);
}
On a side note, I've never had to use this hook and there are probably better ways to handle this which would be more aligned with the React programming model.

Let me introduce to you react-use.
npm install react-use
Wanna run:
only after first render? -------> useUpdateEffect
only once? -------> useEffectOnce
check is it first mount? -------> useFirstMountState
Want to run effect with deep compare, shallow compare or throttle? and much more here.
Don't want to install a library? Check the code & copy. (maybe a star for the good folks there too)
Best thing is one less thing for you to maintain.

A TypeScript and CRA friendly hook, replace it with useEffect, this hook works like useEffect but won't be triggered while the first render happens.
import * as React from 'react'
export const useLazyEffect:typeof React.useEffect = (cb, dep) => {
const initializeRef = React.useRef<boolean>(false)
React.useEffect((...args) => {
if (initializeRef.current) {
cb(...args)
} else {
initializeRef.current = true
}
// eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
}, dep)
}

Here is my implementation based on Estus Flask's answer written in Typescript. It also supports cleanup callback.
import { DependencyList, EffectCallback, useEffect, useRef } from 'react';
export function useDidUpdateEffect(
effect: EffectCallback,
deps?: DependencyList
) {
// a flag to check if the component did mount (first render's passed)
// it's unrelated to the rendering process so we don't useState here
const didMountRef = useRef(false);
// effect callback runs when the dependency array changes, it also runs
// after the component mounted for the first time.
useEffect(() => {
// if so, mark the component as mounted and skip the first effect call
if (!didMountRef.current) {
didMountRef.current = true;
} else {
// subsequent useEffect callback invocations will execute the effect as normal
return effect();
}
}, deps);
}
Live Demo
The live demo below demonstrates the different between useEffect and useDidUpdateEffect hooks

I was going to comment on the currently accepted answer, but ran out of space!
Firstly, it's important to move away from thinking in terms of lifecycle events when using functional components. Think in terms of prop/state changes. I had a similar situation where I only wanted a particular useEffect function to fire when a particular prop (parentValue in my case) changes from its initial state. So, I created a ref that was based on its initial value:
const parentValueRef = useRef(parentValue);
and then included the following at the start of the useEffect fn:
if (parentValue === parentValueRef.current) return;
parentValueRef.current = parentValue;
(Basically, don't run the effect if parentValue hasn't changed. Update the ref if it has changed, ready for the next check, and continue to run the effect)
So, although other solutions suggested will solve the particular use-case you've provided, it will help in the long run to change how you think in relation to functional components.
Think of them as primarily rendering a component based on some props.
If you genuinely need some local state, then useState will provide that, but don't assume your problem will be solved by storing local state.
If you have some code that will alter your props during a render, this 'side-effect' needs to be wrapped in a useEffect, but the purpose of this is to have a clean render that isn't affected by something changing as it's rendering. The useEffect hook will be run after the render has completed and, as you've pointed out, it's run with every render - unless the second parameter is used to supply a list of props/states to identify what changed items will cause it to be run subsequent times.
Good luck on your journey to Functional Components / Hooks! Sometimes it's necessary to unlearn something to get to grips with a new way of doing things :)
This is an excellent primer: https://overreacted.io/a-complete-guide-to-useeffect/

Below solution is similar to above, just a little cleaner way i prefer.
const [isMount, setIsMount] = useState(true);
useEffect(()=>{
if(isMount){
setIsMount(false);
return;
}
//Do anything here for 2nd render onwards
}, [args])

You can use custom hook to run use effect after mount.
const useEffectAfterMount = (cb, dependencies) => {
const mounted = useRef(true);
useEffect(() => {
if (!mounted.current) {
return cb();
}
mounted.current = false;
}, dependencies); // eslint-disable-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
};
Here is the typescript version:
const useEffectAfterMount = (cb: EffectCallback, dependencies: DependencyList | undefined) => {
const mounted = useRef(true);
useEffect(() => {
if (!mounted.current) {
return cb();
}
mounted.current = false;
}, dependencies); // eslint-disable-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
};
Example:
useEffectAfterMount(() => {
document.title = `You clicked ${count} times`;
}, [count])

React, useEfect and axios. infinite loop [duplicate]

Are there ways to simulate componentDidMount in React functional components via hooks?

For the stable version of hooks (React Version 16.8.0+)
For componentDidMount
useEffect(() => {
// Your code here
}, []);
For componentDidUpdate
useEffect(() => {
// Your code here
}, [yourDependency]);
For componentWillUnmount
useEffect(() => {
// componentWillUnmount
return () => {
// Your code here
}
}, [yourDependency]);
So in this situation, you need to pass your dependency into this array. Let's assume you have a state like this
const [count, setCount] = useState(0);
And whenever count increases you want to re-render your function component. Then your useEffect should look like this
useEffect(() => {
// <div>{count}</div>
}, [count]);
This way whenever your count updates your component will re-render. Hopefully this will help a bit.

There is no exact equivalent for componentDidMount in react hooks.
In my experience, react hooks requires a different mindset when developing it and generally speaking you should not compare it to the class methods like componentDidMount.
With that said, there are ways in which you can use hooks to produce a similar effect to componentDidMount.
Solution 1:
useEffect(() => {
console.log("I have been mounted")
}, [])
Solution 2:
const num = 5
useEffect(() => {
console.log("I will only run if my deps change: ", num)
}, [num])
Solution 3 (With function):
useEffect(() => {
const someFunc = () => {
console.log("Function being run after/on mount")
}
someFunc()
}, [])
Solution 4 (useCallback):
const msg = "some message"
const myFunc = useCallback(() => {
console.log(msg)
}, [msg])
useEffect(() => {
myFunc()
}, [myFunc])
Solution 5 (Getting creative):
export default function useDidMountHook(callback) {
const didMount = useRef(null)
useEffect(() => {
if (callback && !didMount.current) {
didMount.current = true
callback()
}
})
}
It is worth noting that solution 5 should only really be used if none of the other solutions work for your use case. If you do decide you need solution 5 then I recommend using this pre-made hook use-did-mount.
Source (With more detail): Using componentDidMount in react hooks

There's no componentDidMount on functional components, but React Hooks provide a way you can emulate the behavior by using the useEffect hook.
Pass an empty array as the second argument to useEffect() to run only the callback on mount only.
Please read the documentation on useEffect.
function ComponentDidMount() {
const [count, setCount] = React.useState(0);
React.useEffect(() => {
console.log('componentDidMount');
}, []);
return (
<div>
<p>componentDidMount: {count} times</p>
<button
onClick={() => {
setCount(count + 1);
}}
>
Click Me
</button>
</div>
);
}
ReactDOM.render(
<div>
<ComponentDidMount />
</div>,
document.querySelector("#app")
);
<script src="https://unpkg.com/react#16.7.0-alpha.0/umd/react.development.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/react-dom#16.7.0-alpha.0/umd/react-dom.development.js"></script>
<div id="app"></div>

useEffect() hook allows us to achieve the functionality of componentDidMount, componentDidUpdate componentWillUnMount functionalities.
Different syntaxes of useEffect() allows to achieve each of the above methods.
i) componentDidMount
useEffect(() => {
//code here
}, []);
ii) componentDidUpdate
useEffect(() => {
//code here
}, [x,y,z]);
//where x,y,z are state variables on whose update, this method should get triggered
iii) componentDidUnmount
useEffect(() => {
//code here
return function() {
//code to be run during unmount phase
}
}, []);
You can check the official react site for more info. Official React Page on Hooks

Although accepted answer works, it is not recommended. When you have more than one state and you use it with useEffect, it will give you warning about adding it to dependency array or not using it at all.
It sometimes causes the problem which might give you unpredictable output. So I suggest that you take a little effort to rewrite your function as class. There are very little changes, and you can have some components as class and some as function. You're not obligated to use only one convention.
Take this for example
function App() {
const [appointments, setAppointments] = useState([]);
const [aptId, setAptId] = useState(1);
useEffect(() => {
fetch('./data.json')
.then(response => response.json())
.then(result => {
const apts = result.map(item => {
item.aptId = aptId;
console.log(aptId);
setAptId(aptId + 1);
return item;
})
setAppointments(apts);
});
}, []);
return(...);
}
and
class App extends Component {
constructor() {
super();
this.state = {
appointments: [],
aptId: 1,
}
}
componentDidMount() {
fetch('./data.json')
.then(response => response.json())
.then(result => {
const apts = result.map(item => {
item.aptId = this.state.aptId;
this.setState({aptId: this.state.aptId + 1});
console.log(this.state.aptId);
return item;
});
this.setState({appointments: apts});
});
}
render(...);
}
This is only for example. so lets not talk about best practices or potential issues with the code. Both of this has same logic but the later only works as expected. You might get componentDidMount functionality with useEffect running for this time, but as your app grows, there are chances that you MAY face some issues. So, rather than rewriting at that phase, it's better to do this at early stage.
Besides, OOP is not that bad, if Procedure-Oriented Programming was enough, we would never have had Object-Oriented Programming. It's painful sometimes, but better (technically. personal issues aside).

import React, { useState, useEffect } from 'react';
function Example() {
const [count, setCount] = useState(0);
// Similar to componentDidMount and componentDidUpdate:
useEffect(() => {
// Update the document title using the browser API
document.title = `You clicked ${count} times`;
});
return (
<div>
<p>You clicked {count} times</p>
<button onClick={() => setCount(count + 1)}>
Click me
</button>
</div>
);
}
Please visit this official docs. Very easy to understand the latest way.
https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-effect.html

Info about async functions inside the hook:
Effect callbacks are synchronous to prevent race conditions. Put the async function inside:
useEffect(() => {
async function fetchData() {
// You can await here
const response = await MyAPI.getData(someId);
// ...
}
fetchData();
}, [someId]); // Or [] if effect doesn't need props or state

useLayoutEffect hook is the best alternative to ComponentDidMount in React Hooks.
useLayoutEffect hook executes before Rendering UI and useEffect hook executes after rendering UI. Use it depend on your needs.
Sample Code:
import { useLayoutEffect, useEffect } from "react";
export default function App() {
useEffect(() => {
console.log("useEffect Statements");
}, []);
useLayoutEffect(() => {
console.log("useLayoutEffect Statements");
}, []);
return (
<div>
<h1>Hello Guys</h1>
</div>
);
}

Yes, there is a way to SIMULATE a componentDidMount in a React functional component
DISCLAIMER: The real problem here is that you need to change from "component life cycle mindset" to a "mindset of useEffect"
A React component is still a javascript function, so, if you want something to be executed BEFORE some other thing you must simply need to execute it first from top to bottom, if you think about it a function it's still a funtion like for example:
const myFunction = () => console.log('a')
const mySecondFunction = () => console.log('b)
mySecondFunction()
myFunction()
/* Result:
'b'
'a'
*/
That is really simple isn't it?
const MyComponent = () => {
const someCleverFunction = () => {...}
someCleverFunction() /* there I can execute it BEFORE
the first render (componentWillMount)*/
useEffect(()=> {
someCleverFunction() /* there I can execute it AFTER the first render */
},[]) /*I lie to react saying "hey, there are not external data (dependencies) that needs to be mapped here, trust me, I will leave this in blank.*/
return (
<div>
<h1>Hi!</h1>
</div>
)}
And in this specific case it's true. But what happens if I do something like that:
const MyComponent = () => {
const someCleverFunction = () => {...}
someCleverFunction() /* there I can execute it BEFORE
the first render (componentWillMount)*/
useEffect(()=> {
someCleverFunction() /* there I can execute it AFTER the first render */
},[]) /*I lie to react saying "hey, there are not external data (dependencies) that needs to be maped here, trust me, I will leave this in blank.*/
return (
<div>
<h1>Hi!</h1>
</div>
)}
This "cleverFunction" we are defining it's not the same in every re-render of the component.
This lead to some nasty bugs and, in some cases to unnecessary re-renders of components or infinite re-render loops.
The real problem with that is that a React functional component is a function that "executes itself" several times depending on your state thanks to the useEffect hook (among others).
In short useEffect it's a hook designed specifically to synchronize your data with whatever you are seeing on the screen. If your data changes, your useEffect hook needs to be aware of that, always. That includes your methods, for that it's the array dependencies.
Leaving that undefined leaves you open to hard-to-find bugs.
Because of that it's important to know how this work, and what you can do to get what you want in the "react" way.
const initialState = {
count: 0,
step: 1,
done: false
};
function reducer(state, action) {
const { count, step } = state;
if (action.type === 'doSomething') {
if(state.done === true) return state;
return { ...state, count: state.count + state.step, state.done:true };
} else if (action.type === 'step') {
return { ...state, step: action.step };
} else {
throw new Error();
}
}
const MyComponent = () => {
const [state, dispatch] = useReducer(reducer, initialState);
const { count, step } = state;
useEffect(() => {
dispatch({ type: 'doSomething' });
}, [dispatch]);
return (
<div>
<h1>Hi!</h1>
</div>
)}
useReducer's dispatch method it's static so it means it will be the same method no matter the amount of times your component is re-rendered. So if you want to execute something just once and you want it rigth after the component is mounted, you can do something like the above example. This is a declarative way of do it right.
Source: The Complete Guide to useEffect - By Dan Abramov
That being said if you like to experiment with things and want to know how to do it "the imperative wat" you can use a useRef() with a counter or a boolean to check if that ref stores a defined reference or not, this is an imperative approach and it's recommended to avoid it if you're not familiar with what happen with react behind curtains.
That is because useRef() is a hook that saves the argument passed to it regardless of the amount of renders (I am keeping it simple because it's not the focus of the problem here, you can read this amazing article about useRef ). So it's the best approach to known when the first render of the component happened.
I leave an example showing 3 different ways of synchronise an "outside" effect (like an external function) with the "inner" component state.
You can run this snippet right here to see the logs and understand when these 3 functions are executed.
const { useRef, useState, useEffect, useCallback } = React
// External functions outside react component (like a data fetch)
function renderOnce(count) {
console.log(`renderOnce: I executed ${count} times because my default state is: undefined by default!`);
}
function renderOnFirstReRender(count) {
console.log(`renderOnUpdate: I executed just ${count} times!`);
}
function renderOnEveryUpdate(count) {
console.log(`renderOnEveryUpdate: I executed ${count ? count + 1 : 1} times!`);
}
const MyComponent = () => {
const [count, setCount] = useState(undefined);
const mounted = useRef(0);
// useCallback is used just to avoid warnings in console.log
const renderOnEveryUpdateCallBack = useCallback(count => {
renderOnEveryUpdate(count);
}, []);
if (mounted.current === 0) {
renderOnce(count);
}
if (mounted.current === 1) renderOnFirstReRender(count);
useEffect(() => {
mounted.current = mounted.current + 1;
renderOnEveryUpdateCallBack(count);
}, [count, renderOnEveryUpdateCallBack]);
return (
<div>
<h1>{count}</h1>
<button onClick={() => setCount(prevState => (prevState ? prevState + 1 : 1))}>TouchMe</button>
</div>
);
};
class App extends React.Component {
render() {
return (
<div>
<h1>hI!</h1>
</div>
);
}
}
ReactDOM.createRoot(
document.getElementById("root")
).render(
<MyComponent/>
);
<div id="root"></div>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/18.1.0/umd/react.development.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/18.1.0/umd/react-dom.development.js"></script>
If you execute it you will see something like this:

You want to use useEffect(), which, depending on how you use the function, can act just like componentDidMount().
Eg. you could use a custom loaded state property which is initially set to false, and switch it to true on render, and only fire the effect when this value changes.
Documentation

the exact equivalent hook for componentDidMount() is
useEffect(()=>{},[]);
hope this helpful :)

How to set initial state value for useState Hook in jest and enzyme?

I know this question is already asked here: How to set initial state for useState Hook in jest and enzyme?
const [state, setState] = useState([]);
And I totally agree with Jimmy's Answer to mock the useState function from test file but I have some extended version of this question, "What if I have multiple useState statements into the hooks, How can I test them and assign the respective custom values to them?"
I have some JSX rendering with the condition of hook's state values and depending on the values of that state the JSX is rendering.
How Can I test those JSX by getting them into the wrapper of my test case code?

Upon the answer you linked, you can return different values for each call of a mock function:
let myMock = jest.fn();
myMock
.mockReturnValueOnce(10)
.mockReturnValueOnce('x')
.mockReturnValue(true);
In my opinion this is still brittle. You may modify the component and add another state later, and you would get confusing results.
Another way to test a React component is to test it like a user would by clicking things and setting values on inputs. This would fire the event handlers of the component, and React would update the state just as in real configuration. You may not be able to do shallow rendering though, or you may need to mock the child components.
If you prefer shallow rendering, maybe read initial state values from props like this:
function FooComponent({initialStateValue}) {
const [state, setState] = useState(initialStateValue ?? []);
}

If you don't really need to test state but the effects state has on children, you should (as some comments mention) just then test the side effect and treat the state as an opaque implementation detail. This will work if your are not using shallow rendering or not doing some kind of async initialization like fetching data in an effect or something otherwise it could require more work.
If you cant do the above, you might consider removing state completely out of the component and make it completely functional. That way any state you need, you can just inject it into the component. You could wrap all of the hooks into a 'controller' type hook that encapsulates the behavior of a component or domain. Here is an example of how you might do that with a <Todos />. This code is 0% tested, its just written to show a concept.
const useTodos = (state = {}) => {
const [todos, setTodos] = useState(state.todos);
const id = useRef(Date.now());
const addTodo = useCallback((task) => {
setTodos((current) => [...current, { id: id.current++, completed: false, task }]);
}, []);
const removeTodo = useCallback((id) => {
setTodos((current) => current.filter((t) => t.id !== id));
}, []);
const completeTodo = useCallback((id) => {
setTodos((current) => current.map((t) => {
let next = t;
if (t.id === id) {
next = { ...t, completed: true };
}
return next;
}))
}, []);
return { todos, addTodo, removeTodo, completeTodo };
};
const Todos = (props) => {
const { todos, onAdd, onRemove, onComplete } = props;
const onSubmit = (e) => {
e.preventDefault();
onAdd({ task: e.currentTarget.elements['todo'].value });
}
return (
<div classname="todos">
<ul className="todos-list">
{todos.map((todo) => (
<Todo key={todo.id} onRemove={onRemove} onComplete={onComplete} />
)}
</ul>
<form className="todos-form" onSubmit={onSubmit}>
<input name="todo" />
<button>Add</button>
</form>
</div>
);
};
So now the parent component injects <Todos /> with todos and callbacks. This is useful for testing, SSR, ect. Your component can just take a list of todos and some handlers, and more importantly you can trivially test both. For <Todos /> you can pass mocks and known state and for useTodos you would just call the methods and make sure the state reflects what is expected.
You might be thinking This moves the problem up a level and it does, but you can now test the component/logic and increase test coverage. The glue layer would require minimal if any testing around this component, unless you really wanted to make sure props are passed into the component.