Performance (memo, useCallback & useMemo)

Let's start this off by reviewing what I believe to be the most fundamental aspect of React; your UI is just a function of your state.

UI = Fn(State)

One of the best parts of React is that you can use the same intuition that you have about regular JavaScript functions for when and where you should create React components. However, instead of your function taking in some arguments and returning a value, your function is going to take in some arguments (**props**) and return an object representation of your UI (**JSX**). Whenever the state of a component changes or it receives new props, the component will re-render, updating the UI.

With the advent of Hooks, this concept becomes even more applicable since React components are now literally just functions. Like normal functions, by default, any code you have in your component is going to get executed whenever the component re-renders. Typically this is fine, but occasionally you need a way to opt of re-rendering expensive components.

To see different strategies for accomplishing this, let's imagine we were building an app that allowed users to find the nth number in the Fibonacci sequence as well as the nth prime number.


Here's what one approach could look like. We'll have two state values, **fibCount** and **primeCount****fibCount** for deriving the **fibCount** number in the Fibonacci sequence and **primeCount** for deriving the **primeCount** prime number. From there, we'll create two components to do the heavy lifting for us, **NthFib** and **NthPrime**. Both will be passed their associated **count** as well as a way to increment that count.

Do you see any issues with this code? If not, play around with it for a bit and see if you notice anything. Hint: it has to do with performance.

We know that with React, whenever a component receives new props or the state of a component changes, it'll re-render. Applied to our example, whenever **fibCount** or **primeCount** change, the **App** component will re-render, and with it **NthFib** and **NthPrime**.

On the surface, there doesn't appear to be anything wrong here since it works how you'd expect. However, both **NthFib** and **NthPrime** our computationally expensive. We're re-rendering both components on every render, regardless of if their **count** prop changes. Instead, what we want to do is only re-render **NthFib** when **fibCount**changes and only re-render **NthPrime** when **primeCount** changes. This way, we'll avoid unnecessarily re-rendering our computationally expensive components. One tool we can use to accomplish this is **React.memo**.


**React.memo** is a Higher-order component that lets you skip re-rendering a component if its props haven't changed. The way it does this is when a component is wrapped in **React.memo()**, React will render the component and memoize the result. On subsequent re-renders, React will perform a shallow comparison (**===**) between the previous props and the new props - if the props haven't changed, React will skip rendering the component and reuse the last rendered result.

What this means for our example is we can wrap the exports of our computationally expensive components (**NthFib** and **NthPrime**) in **React.memo** and they'll only re-render when their props change.

So at this point, we're good, right? Unfortunately, no. Even though we're now using **React.memo**, if you play around with the code, you'll notice **NthFib** and **NthPrime**are still re-rendering as much as they were before we added it. Can you tell why? To better answer this, we need to hop over to vanilla JavaScript land and talk about the difference between Primitive and Reference values. If you're already familiar with the topic, feel free to skip the next section.

Primitive vs. Reference Values

Whenever you create a variable in JavaScript, that variable can store one of two types of data, a primitive value or a reference value. If the value is a **number****string****boolean****undefined****null**, or **symbol**, it's a primitive value. If it's anything else (i.e. typeof **object**), it's a reference value.

On the surface, primitive values and reference values look the same, but under the hood, they behave much differently. The key difference can be seen in how they store their value in memory. If you looked at the in-memory value of a primitive, you'd see the actual value itself (**28****'Tyler'****false**, etc). If you looked at the in-memory value of a reference type, you'd see a memory address (or a "reference" to a spot in memory). In practice, though, what difference does it make? Let's take a look at some examples.

First, we create a variable called **surname** and assign the string **McGinnis** to it. Then we create a new variable called **displayName** and assign it to whatever the in-memory value of **surname** is, which happens to be **McGinnis**. From there we change the in-memory value of **surname** to be **Anderson**. Now, when we log **surname** we get **Anderson** and when we log **displayName** we get **McGinnis**. Though this example demonstrates that the in-memory value of a primitive is the value itself, there's nothing surprising or really interesting going on here.

Let's look at a similar example but instead of using a primitive value, let's use a reference value.

First, we create a variable called **leo** and assign it to an object which has two properties, **type** and **name**. Then we create a new variable called **snoop** and assign it to whatever the in-memory value of **leo** is, which is the reference to the spot in memory where the **leo** object is located. At this point, both **leo** and **snoop** are referencing the same spot in memory. What that means is when we modify ****, because **snoop** and **leo** are referencing the same spot in memory, it's as if we also modified ****. That's why when we log **** and **** we get the same value, **Snoop**.

Let's look at one more example to cement your understanding. What do you think happens when, using the identity operator (**===**), we compare two primitives that have the same value?

Here we see that because **name** and **friend** have the same value, **Tyler**, when comparing them, we get **true**. This probably seems obvious, but it's important to realize that the reason we get **true** is because, with the identity operator, primitives are compared by their value. Since both values equal **Tyler**, comparing them evaluates to **true**.

Now, what about reference values?

Even though **leo** and **leito** have the same properties and values, when comparing them with the identity operator, we get **false**. The reason for that is because, unlike primitive values, reference values are compared by their reference, or their location in memory. Above, even though **leo** and **leito** have the same properties and values, they're occupying different locations in memory.

Both these examples demonstrate how primitive types are compared by their value, while reference types are compared by their reference.

Fixing our React.memo

Alright, let's jump back to our problem we were experiencing earlier with **React.memo**. We saw that even though we added **React.memo****NthFib** and **NthPrime** were still re-rendering as much as they were before we added it. After reading the previous section, you may have a hint as to why that is. **React.memo** uses the identity operator (**===**) to compare the previous props with the current props. For both our **NthFib**component and **NthPrime** component, we're passing an inline function as the **increment** prop.

This means for every render, we're creating a brand new function in memory. Because functions are reference types, when **React.memo** compares the previous **increment**prop with the new **increment** prop, even though they appear the same, they're compared by their references which will always be different.

We have two options to fix this. We can either customize **React.memo** to only compare the **count** props and ignore the **increment** props or we can make the **increment**props the same reference across renders.

To do the former, we can pass a function as the second argument to **React.memo**which will receive two arguments, the previous props and the current props. You can think of this function as a **propsAreEqual** function. If the **propsAreEqual**, return **true** and don't re-render. If they're not, return **false** and do re-render.

That works fine for this scenario, but to me, the more interesting approach is to persist the references of the **increment** props across renders. This is where the built-in **useCallback** Hook can help us out.


**useCallback** returns a memoized callback. What this means is that any function you create with **useCallback** won't be re-created on subsequent re-renders. It takes two arguments, a function and an array of values that the function depends on. The memoized function it returns will only change if one of the values in the dependency array change.

This is particularly useful for our use case because of the issues we ran into earlier with **React.memo**. Instead of passing an inline function as the **increment**  prop and creating a brand new function on every render, we can utilize **useCallback**  to create one function on the initial render, and reuse it on subsequent renders. This means when **React.memo** compares the previous **increment** prop with the new **increment**prop, the reference will be the same and the identity operator (**===**) will work as expected.

To recap so far, we've seen how **React.memo** allows us to memoize an entire component based on its props. From there, because we were passing a reference type (a function) as a prop, we needed to use **useCallback** in order to get referential equality between renders so **React.memo** would work how we'd expect. Now, let's look at a different approach.

If you think about our example more granularly, there are only two computationally expensive parts of our app, our **calculateFib** and **calculatePrime** functions. The reason we needed to reach for **React.memo** (and subsequently **useCallback**) was because we were invoking those functions inside of our **NthFib** and **NthPrime**components.

What if, instead of memoizing at the component level using **React.memo**, we memoize the expensive calculations themselves? So what we need is a way to tell React to only invoke **calculateFib** on re-renders where **fibCount** has changed and only invoke **calculatePrime** on re-renders where **primeCount** has changed, otherwise, use whatever the values were from the previous render. This is the exact use case for the built-in **useMemo** Hook.


**useMemo** takes two arguments, a function and an array of values that the function depends on. It returns a value that will be computed on the initial render and whenever any of the values in the dependency array change.

Now, using our new-found knowledge of **useMemo**, we can get rid of **React.memo** and **useCallback** and only memoize the computationally expensive parts of our app, **calculateFib** and **calculatePrime**.

It may seem like you can use **useMemo** to persist values across renders. However, React treats **useMemo** as a performance hint rather than a guarantee. This means that React may choose to forget previously memoized values under certain use cases. To persist a value across renders, use **useRef**.


As with any talk about performance, I feel obligated to include that performance optimizations are never free. If they were, they'd be included by default. The same applies to **React.memo****useCallback**, and **useMemo**. The default behavior of React isn't to memoize components, functions or values because the majority of the time it's unnecessary.

Copyright 2022 © Borja Leiva

Made within London