Android

Why doesn't Flutter need Hooks

Author : Android Dev
Published Time : 2025-11-05
In the Flutter community, the concept of "Hooks" is often mentioned, and many developers are trying to introduce React's Hooks pattern into Flutter. However, this transplantation is often based on a misunderstanding of the essential differences between the two technologies. This article will analyze in depth why Flutter does not need or should not imitate React Hooks from three dimensions: technical architecture, design philosophy, and practical verification.


Core viewpoint: Four technical facts

1. There is no such issue

React's class components require manual binding of this, which is a historical legacy issue of the JavaScript language feature:

// React: This must be bound
class Counter extends React.Component {
  constructor(props) {
    super(props);
    this.state = { count: 0 };
    this.handleClick = this.handleClick.bind(this); // Must be bound
  }
  
  handleClick() {
    this.setState({ count: this.state.count + 1 });
  }
}

Flutter uses Dart language, and there is no such problem:

// Flutter: Directly using method references
class Counter extends StatefulWidget {
  @override
  _CounterState createState() => _CounterState();
}

class _CounterState extends State<Counter> {
  int _count = 0;
  
  void _increment() {  // No binding required, use directly
    setState(() => _count++);
  }
  
  @override
  Widget build(BuildContext context) {
    return ElevatedButton(
      onPressed: _increment,  // direct quotation
      child: Text('$_count'),
    );
  }
}

Hooks were born to some extent to solve React's this binding problem, but Flutter doesn't have this pain point at all.

2. Clear and precise definition of lifecycle

The lifecycle method definition of React's class components is vague and easily confused:

// React: Chaotic lifecycle approach
componentDidMount() {
  // After component mounting
}

componentDidUpdate(prevProps, prevState) {
  // After the component update, it is difficult to distinguish whether it is a change in props or state
}

componentWillUnmount() {
  // Before uninstalling components
}

Each lifecycle method of Flutter has clear responsibilities and call timing:

// Flutter: Clear and orderly lifecycle
class _MyWidgetState extends State<MyWidget> {
  @override
  void initState() {
    super.initState();
    // Call only once: initialize state, subscribe, create controller
  }
  
  @override
  void didUpdateWidget(MyWidget oldWidget) {
    super.didUpdateWidget(oldWidget);
    // Clearly knowing that there is a change in widget configuration
    if (widget.userId != oldWidget.userId) {
      // Response to configuration changes
    }
  }
  
  @override
  void didChangeDependencies() {
    super.didChangeDependencies();
    // Clearly knowing that the InheritedWidget that is dependent has changed
  }
  
  @override
  void dispose() {
    // Clean up resources, unsubscribe
    super.dispose();
  }
}

More importantly, Flutter's official guidance states that the build method should be kept pure, only describing the UI, and side effects should be included in initState or other lifecycle methods. This design makes the code more predictable and easier to debug.

3. Architecture mismatch: Conflict between Class and Function

Hooks are based on functional design, while Flutter's Widget system is based on class design. Forcefully applying the function pattern in the class architecture can cause confusion in the "four unlikes":

// Assumed Flutter Hooks (not recommended)
Widget build(BuildContext context) {
  final count = useState(0);      // Functional Hook
  final name = useState('');      // Another Hook
  
  useEffect(() {                   // Side effects Hook
    print('Count changed: $count');
  }, [count]);
  
  if (someCondition) {
    // Error: Cannot call Hook in condition
    final extra = useState(false);
  }
  
  return Container(); // The build method for class components
}

This hybrid mode brings all the limitations of Hooks, but does not provide any additional value. Flutter's Widget architecture is already elegant enough, and there is no need for such inconsistent modifications.

4. Learning Costs and Black Magic

Hooks introduce complex rules and psychological models:

Call order dependency: Hooks must be called in the same order each time they are rendered

Closure trap: Dependency arrays in useEffect are prone to errors

Rule restriction: Hooks cannot be called in a loop, condition, or nested function

In contrast, Flutter's native solution is simple and intuitive:

// Flutter: Simple and intuitive state management
class Counter extends StatefulWidget {
  @override
  _CounterState createState() => _CounterState();
}

class _CounterState extends State<Counter> {
  int _count = 0;  // Direct state variables
  
  void _increment() {
    setState(() => _count++);  // Clear update method
  }
  
  @override
  Widget build(BuildContext context) {
    return ElevatedButton(
      onPressed: _increment,
      child: Text('$_count'),
    );
  }
}

The advantage of Hooks is only that the code looks simple, but the disadvantages it brings include:

  • a steep learning curve
  • Complex debugging process
  • Hidden runtime errors
  • Compatibility issues with the existing Flutter ecosystem


Architecture Comparison: Why Flutter Doesn't Need Hooks

The fundamental difference in rendering mechanism

React requires Hooks because of the architecture limitations of Virtual DOM:

// React: Virtual DOM Manual optimization is required
function ExpensiveComponent({ data }) {
  const memoizedValue = useMemo(() => 
    computeExpensiveValue(data), [data]  // Must be manually memorized
  );
  
  const handleClick = useCallback(() => {
    console.log(data);  // Functions must be manually cached
  }, [data]);
  
  return <div onClick={handleClick}>{memoizedValue}</div>;
}

Flutter's Widget architecture naturally solves these problems:

// Flutter: Compiler auto optimization
class ExpensiveWidget extends StatelessWidget {
  final String data;
  
  const ExpensiveWidget({Key? key, required this.data}) : super(key: key);
  
  String _computeExpensiveValue(String input) {
    // Expensive calculations
    return input.toUpperCase();
  }
  
  void _handleClick() {
    print(data);  // No need for manual caching
  }
  
  @override
  Widget build(BuildContext context) {
    return GestureDetector(
      onTap: _handleClick,
      child: Text(_computeExpensiveValue(data)),  //Compiler optimization 
    );
  }
}

Flutter's const constructor and compiler optimization make manual memorization unnecessary.

Conclusion: Embracing Flutter's design philosophy

Through in-depth technical analysis and practical verification, we can draw a clear conclusion: Flutter does not require Hooks, and Hooks should not be introduced.

Flutter's design itself is a better solution to React problems:

1. No this binding issue - Dart language's closure feature eliminates this pain point

2. Clear lifecycle - each method has clear responsibilities and call timing

3. Architecture Natural Matching - The class design of Widgets fundamentally conflicts with the functional design of Hooks

4. Complete state management - from setState to VNet, forming a complete solution

5. Performance optimization built-in - const constructor and compiler optimization make manual optimization unnecessary

The true master of a framework is not knowing how many patterns there are, but understanding the design intent behind each pattern and choosing the most suitable tool to solve practical problems.

As the core developers of Flutter said, 'Flutter is not React for mobile. Flutter is Flutter.' Let's stop trying to turn Flutter into React and make it the best Flutter.