Ok! I think I got it! It's very very nastly tho lmao! But this will merge in the new SSR-provided data before the new page can render, instead of having it sometimes make redundant network requests & show loading spinners in the meantime for data that Next.js already fulfilled for it.
Nasty nasty lil trick. But it seems to be working! Let's see how it does lmao
Ahhh right, a new `initialCacheState` value comes in on every navigation, so if our memoized Apollo client depends on that value, then it's gonna keep getting reset, and thereby dumping everything out of its cache. Rude.
This solution is clearly incomplete, the ideal would be to merge the SSR'd data into the cache each time. But it should be fine in practice I think, we already have good coverage of preloading stuff via GraphQL anyway!
Whew, setting up a cute GraphQL SSR system! I feel like it strikes a good balance of not having actually too many moving parts, though it's still a bit extensive for the problem we're solving 😅
Anyway, by doing SSR at _all_, we solve the problem where Next's "Automatic Static Optimization" was causing problems by setting the outfit state to the default at the start of the page load.
So I figured, why not try to SSR things _good_?
Now, when you navigate to the /outfits/new page, Next.js will go get the necessary GraphQL data to show the image before even putting the page into view. This makes the image show up all snappy-like! (when images.neopets.com is behaving :p)
We could do this with the stuff in the items panel too, but it's a tiny bit more annoying in the code right now, so I'm just gonna not worry about it and see how this performs in practice!
This change _doesn't_ include making the images actually show up before JS loads in, I assume because our JS code tries to validate that the images have loaded before fading them in on the page. Idk if we want to do something smarter there for the SSR case, to try to get them loading in faster!
Okay, when I saw the recipe in the Next.js docs with `getLayout`, I was like "psh this API is so confusing, this should just be a component"
anyway now we see why it wasn't a component: the _whole point_ of it was to circumvent the usual React diffing algorithm's belief that two different components _can't_ ever share UI. But here we were, making different `layoutComponent`s that were meant to share UI, lol!
Anyway, if you just _return JSX in a function_, the React diffing algorithm never sees that it came from a different place, so it's generous when diffing them. Neat!
But I still changed the recipe's `getLayout` name to `renderWithLayout`, because it just confused me so much at first lol, I thought it was going to like, return a layout function? This is much clearer verbing to me imo
The first page moved over! Note that this broke navigation on the rest of the app, so don't deploy this until we're done!
The reason it broke was that we had to migrate GlobalHeader and GlobalFooter to the Next.js link & router stuff too, or else it crashed because it wasn't in a react-router-dom context.
Just sorta idly poking at what it would take to make our Next setup a bit more normal. To start, I'm putting things in more of the normal place, and eyeing what it would take to switch to Next's built-in routing! So now `App.js` is pretty much entirely a routing file, potentially to be deleted once we move 🤔
Idk why Next made me these files in a way that created React errors but ok! Maybe it was because we didn't have `pages` in the `includes`, so my editor was using the default tsconfig instead of this one?
I'm interested in ejecting from Vercel, so I'm trying to get off their proprietary-ish create-react-app + Vercel API thing, and onto Nextjs, which is very similar in shape, but more portable.
I had to disable `craCompat` in `next.config.js` to stop us from crashing on their webpack config, see https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/25858#discussioncomment-1573822
The frontend seems to work at a basic level, but network requests fail, and images don't seem to be working. I'll work on those next!
Note that this commit was forced through despite failing lint checks. We'll need to fix that up too!
Also, after the codemod, I moved `src/pages` to the more canonical location `pages`. Lint tooling seemed surprised to not find a `pages` directory, and I didn't see a config that was making it work correctly in the other location, so I figured it's that Next is willing to check `pages` or `src/pages`? But this is more canonical so yeah!
