4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Delba de Oliveira c2b4c0815c Unify caching story across the docs (#90149)
This PRs unifies the caching story across the docs, making Cache
Components the happy path, while still providing guidance to users in
the old model. However, instead of explaining the old model and its
caching layers, we've created a new guide focusing on what APIs to use
and when.

This follow-up PR aligns terminology across the docs:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/90589

## IA updates

Getting Started section: 

- Improves Getting Started progression:
- **Before:** CC → Fetching Data → Updating Data → Caching and
Revalidating (old and new model mixed)
- **After:** Fetching Data (Dynamic) → Mutating Data (Dynamic) → Caching
with CC (Prerendering) → Revalidating with CC.
- New: `caching.mdx` (CC-first)
   - Structure: 
      - Enabling Cache Components
      - Data vs UI-level caching
      - Working with request time APIs
      - Passing request values to cached functions
      - Working with non-deterministic operations
      - Working with synchronous operations
      - How rendering works (PPR and static shell story)
- New: `revalidating.mdx` (CC-first)
   - Explains how to use `cacheLife` and `cacheTag`

Guides Section: 

- New: `caching-and-revalidating.mdx` (Previous Model)
- For users who are not using CC, includes `fetch` options and route
segment config
- Moves route segment config options that don't apply to CC from API
reference to this guide (for easy archiving in the future).
- New: `migrating-to-cache-components.mdx` (WIP)
- Del: `caching.mdx` 😌 

## Terminology

We should remove caching layers from the docs. Users only needed to be
exposed to them when they were configured independently, but the new CC
APIs work across layers.

To make it easier to review this PR, I'm consolidating terminology and
fixing broken links in a new PR:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/90589

---------

Co-authored-by: Vercel <vercel[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Joseph <joseph.chamochumbi@vercel.com>
2026-03-03 13:14:24 +00:00
Delba de Oliveira 24434f18db Docs: Add Data Security Guide (#80249)
Closes: https://linear.app/vercel/issue/DOC-4678/guide-data-security

Please merge this PR first: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/80242

---------

Co-authored-by: graphite-app[bot] <96075541+graphite-app[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Joseph <joseph.chamochumbi@vercel.com>
2025-06-10 06:52:38 -05:00
Jam Balaya e5ce54de0b docs: use relative urls (#72941)
## Description
Follow up #52038.
Remove `https://nextjs.org` from URL in [error
pages](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/tree/canary/errors).

### Improving Documentation

- [x] Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening
the PR.
- [x] Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution
follows the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide

---------

Co-authored-by: Delba de Oliveira <32464864+delbaoliveira@users.noreply.github.com>
2024-11-19 08:58:29 +00:00
Shu Ding 7b2b982343 fix: Add stricter check for "use server" exports (#62821)
As mentioned in the new-added error messages, and the [linked
resources](https://react.dev/reference/react/use-server#:~:text=Because%20the%20underlying%20network%20calls%20are%20always%20asynchronous%2C%20%27use%20server%27%20can%20only%20be%20used%20on%20async%20functions.):

> Because the underlying network calls are always asynchronous, 'use
server' can only be used on async functions.
> https://react.dev/reference/react/use-server

It's a requirement that only async functions are allowed to be exported
and annotated with `'use server'`. Currently, we already have compiler
check so this will already error:

```js
'use server'

export function foo () {} // missing async
```

However, since exported values can be very dynamic the compiler can't
catch all mistakes like that. We also have a runtime check for all
exports in a `'use server'` function, but it only covers `typeof value
=== 'function'`.

This PR adds a stricter check for "use server" annotated values to also
make sure they're async functions (`value.constructor.name ===
'AsyncFunction'`).

That said, there are still cases like synchronously returning a promise
to make a function "async", but it's still very different by definition.
For example:

```js
const f = async () => { throw 1; return 1 }
const g = () => { throw 1; return Promise.resolve(1) }
```

Where `g()` can be synchronously caught (`try { g() } catch {}`) but
`f()` can't even if they have the same types. If we allow `g` to be a
Server Action, this behavior is no longer always true but depending on
where it's called (server or client).

Closes #62727.
2024-03-04 18:50:19 +01:00