I'll make it really easy for you - ignore everything in that list except fetch.
The rest is nasty, nasty bloat. Saga in particular is one of the most pointless and libraries I've ever seen. Total solution looking for a problem.
The rest is nasty, nasty bloat. Saga in particular is one of the most pointless and libraries I've ever seen. Total solution looking for a problem.
My point, however, was that this is not obvious for anyone starting with React.
This is caused by the fact that React is "no batteries included", which means that you have to find the right batteries at a moment when you lack all knowledge about batteries in the first place. You search "how to send to backend" and saga's pop up, explaining why they are better than useEffect or redux or whatever (at a moment you may not even know useEffect or its downsides).
Compare that to Rails which has "all batteries included" (and which is a nightmare in itself, too, though), where all those choices are made for you. You can choose to ignore Rails' testing suite and instead erect an rspec setup next to it, but you'll do so consiously. Because that moment when you asked yourself "how do I test in rails" the One True Way was there, configured, ready for use and documented.
Both have tradeoffs and pros and cons. But the React community (with tutorials, this weeks best practices, breakspeed iterations of tooling) is not helping here. At all.
There are some default choices in Rails that I disagree with. E.g., I think it's too database-focused, and I build things that often aren't. But I still know I can get started with Rails and expect it all to just work. I know that people with Rails experience will be able to jump in without much pain. And then if I depart from the standard path, I have a good sense of where I might get into trouble.
There are some very clever things you can do with them, but this really need to know all the ins and outs of it first, and by the time you've learned them you implemented a giant nightmare.
Where sagas _do_ still make sense is highly complex async workflows, including responding to dispatched actions, "background thread"-type behavior, and lots of debouncing/throttling/etc.
But yes, I've heard of plenty of cases where sagas made a codebase unreadable, and it's a shame that they get so heavily pushed by some early Redux users.
FWIW, I've actually been working on designing a new "action listener middleware" that we'd like to ship in an upcoming version of Redux Toolkit. It started off as very simple callbacks, but by adding a few key primitive functions like `take`, `condition`, and `delay` I think we've been able to to come up with something that can handle maybe 75% of what sagas can do with a much smaller API surface and bundle size. I'd love to have you or anyone else using Redux take a look and give us some feedback on the current API design and let us know if there's other use cases it ought to cover: