Component count is around 140. Fwiw, some are stateless, functional components while others are more complex.

A form of master/detail is driving the need to detect prop changes to fetch additional data while freeing previous data. Consider the master/detail of multiple levels deep driven by route parameters through the ui hierarchy. In RN, this is less of an issue since screens tend to be more focused and ui stack driven. But users working full-time in a complex ui specialized for power users can require much more data/dynamism.

Fair enough. As mentioned in Update on Async Rendering blog post, there’s a less verbose data fetching API coming down the line (“suspense”). Not quite ready for the release yet. But it will require components to be async-compatible which is why we're getting these lifecycle changes out now.

Intriguing. Been too busy cranking on a new product to stay up on the latest changes so thanks for the pointer. I have lots of reading to do.

And thanks for listening about my use case. One concern about using a static function for getDerivedStateFromProps() is that it will not allow for taking instance variables into account. Have not thought through how that might come into play but components certainly allow for this, though many may feel it a strange idea. Perhaps a reference to the component could be passed as well as an additional argument.

I look forward to coming up for air and catching up with the improved approach. Things continue to move quickly and I continue to be impressed at how the changes bring improvement to the ecosystem.

Lack of instance is intentional—otherwise we would’ve made it an instance method. Happy to hear about specific patterns you’re aiming for but since getDerivedStateFromProps executes during the “render phase” (interruptible in async mode) we want people to treat it as pure and discourage them from any side effects and mutations. If you really need some instance variable there then perhaps you could move it into state.