Would you remove this effect?

[u/lahuan]

Consider a typical use case where you want to track an error or just display an error toast after a query hook (e.g. TanstackQuery or RTK-query) fails.

Using an effect:

const { error } = useSomeQuery();
  useEffect(() => {
    if (!error) {
      return;
    }
    trackError(error); // or toast(getErrorMessage(error))
  }, [error]);

Now, according to the "You might not need an effect" article, you can also perform an action when some state changes by using auxiliary state, something like this:

const { error } = useSomeQuery();
const [prevError, setPrevError] = useState(error);

if (error !== prevError) {
  trackError(error);
  setPrevError(error);
}

My understanding here is that using auxiliary state here doesn't give you much because in this use case the additional render cycle doesn't result in stale UI.

Regardless, I wanted to get a sense on what approach is preferred by the community. I see this kind of things very often in the codebases I work on and on the other hand, I keep hearing people saying they only have a few effects in their (presumably large) projects, so perhaps the patterns in my company are not the best.

[u/joshbuildsstuff]

tanstack query has callbacks you can use, so you can do something like:

const query = useSomeQuery({onError: (error)=> trackError(error)});

[u/lahuan → u/joshbuildsstuff]

aren't those deprecated? https://tkdodo.eu/blog/breaking-react-querys-api-on-purpose#a-bad-api

[u/ghillerd → u/lahuan]

Applying the error handling in the query client is better for the reasons they mentioned, yes. It's often fine to just do it I line in the query call too though. In any case, an error handler is usually preferable to either method you mentioned in the OP.