(fiber, hasPassiveEffects)
| 27323 | } |
| 27324 | |
| 27325 | function commitDoubleInvokeEffectsInDEV(fiber, hasPassiveEffects) { |
| 27326 | { |
| 27327 | // TODO (StrictEffects) Should we set a marker on the root if it contains strict effects |
| 27328 | // so we don't traverse unnecessarily? similar to subtreeFlags but just at the root level. |
| 27329 | // Maybe not a big deal since this is DEV only behavior. |
| 27330 | setCurrentFiber(fiber); |
| 27331 | invokeEffectsInDev(fiber, MountLayoutDev, invokeLayoutEffectUnmountInDEV); |
| 27332 | |
| 27333 | if (hasPassiveEffects) { |
| 27334 | invokeEffectsInDev(fiber, MountPassiveDev, invokePassiveEffectUnmountInDEV); |
| 27335 | } |
| 27336 | |
| 27337 | invokeEffectsInDev(fiber, MountLayoutDev, invokeLayoutEffectMountInDEV); |
| 27338 | |
| 27339 | if (hasPassiveEffects) { |
| 27340 | invokeEffectsInDev(fiber, MountPassiveDev, invokePassiveEffectMountInDEV); |
| 27341 | } |
| 27342 | |
| 27343 | resetCurrentFiber(); |
| 27344 | } |
| 27345 | } |
| 27346 | |
| 27347 | function invokeEffectsInDev(firstChild, fiberFlags, invokeEffectFn) { |
| 27348 | { |
no test coverage detected
searching dependent graphs…