Add a default fetcher using Fetch API #367
Conversation
|
I agree on this one, but would love to hear more discussions! |
|
Love it. Would request a note about best practices for error responses; that particular default leads to a lot of vague SyntaxErrors |
|
I think when you want to handle error errors is when you will start to use a custom build fetcher, this fetcher should allow you to start using SWR without any config or boilerplate until you need a better fetcher |
|
But yeah we may need to better document how to handle errors, specially because Fetch does not throw in all the HTTP errors |
|
I really like this idea, since it makes it easier to hit the ground running with SWR. |
|
This is great, I always need to make that simple fetcher on small demos. Also, I think this would help new people using SWR easily |
|
So, I tried @pacocoursey 's idea for SWR as a local cache but this PR fills the console with localhost:3000/whatever 404 errors. 😱 |
|
@brandonpittman you will need to define a custom fetcher then, maybe you can try passing undefined as your fetcher 🤔 |
|
@sergiodxa Yeah, passing |
This allows again for lazy execution since passing `undefined` broke with the introduction of a default fetcher in vercel#367
* Allow passing null as the fetcher function This allows again for lazy execution since passing `undefined` broke with the introduction of a default fetcher in #367 * Fix syntax for null fetcher Co-authored-by: Shu Ding <[email protected]>
Not sure if you want this, but I found most of the time a simple fetcher like
url => fetch(url).then(res => res.json())is more than enough to use useSWR until you have reasons to build your own fetcher (like handling errors or parsing the response in a specific way).I believe adding a default one could make using SWR a little bit faster since now you will only need to install and use.
@shuding if you prefer to don't provide a default one feel free to close this PR.