For simple use cases, we also use this pattern, however, usually moved to separate functions for readability, real example:

    createOpener(folder) {
        return () => this.props.dispatch(Actions.listFiles(folder, this.props.member));
    }

As said, for more complex layouts we need to reduce moving parts. For example, we have input masks that can easily consist of 200 input fields alone plus all kinds of other components. What we do in that case is usually pre-binding functions with arguments. Roughly like this:

    // Target function
    onItemClicked(item) {
        // ...
    }
    
    preBind() {
        const { data } = this.props;

        // Bind with primary key
        data.forEach(item => {
            this[`__boundFn_data_${item.get('primaryKey')}`] = this.onItemClicked.bind(this, item);
        })
    }

    render() {
        const { data } = this.props;

        return <Fragment>
            {
                data.map(item => {
                    const pk = item.get('primaryKey');

                    return <div key={pk} onClick={this[`__boundFn_data_${pk}`]}>{ item.get('label') }</div>
                })
            }
        </Fragment>
    }

This approach involves a lot more complexity concerning removing bound functions and caching. And things like function name generation is stored in separate functions etc. It's not trivial but you get some performance out of it.

By doing this, though, we can rely on props checks for components to determined the necessity of rendering which allows us to use React's PureComponent in 90% of our components.

> How can I do this without defining a function?

You do define a function, but only once. Constructor:

  this.smth = this.smth.bind(this);

JSX:

  <button onClick={this.smth}></button>

Kind of awkward, but the standard practice last I checked. Arrow methods (terminology?) are also something you can add to the language that does the equivalent of .bind() replacements.

isn't that functionally equivalent to `onClick={ this.smth }`?

No it is not equal because the former autobinds `this` into the body of the arrow function, however the latter is "just" a function pointer hence will not be called with the correct `this` value. One way to get around this is using `this.smth.bind(this)`, which binds the correct `this` for the later execution.

no, because you're not passing the arg in now right?

Of course you are. The `smth` method will receive whatever arguments the caller gives.

This totally works but only if `smth` has been declared as an arrow function (so that is captures the class `this` context).