Testing: Update guidance around unique element IDs #72748
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
aduth
requested review from
ajitbohra,
gziolo,
nerrad and
ntwb
as code owners
aduth
added
the
[Type] Automated Testing
Technically imported through `@wordpress/element`
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
|
Size Change: 0 B Total Size: 2.37 MB ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
tyxla
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
Updates lint rules to reflect updated standards around unique IDs.
Why?
withInstanceIdwas originally created to address a need for standardized unique ID creation, but should ideally be phased out:useInstanceId)useIdhook which serves this purposeHow?
withInstanceIdwith ReactuseIdMath.random. While this may have been an issue historically, it creates a lot of false positive, and there should now be general knowledge ofuseIdfor creating unique IDs that (in combination with the syntax linter around string assignment of IDs) most issues should be avoidableTesting Instructions
Lint checks should pass.