I actually did interrupt the article in the middle to offer help, which is in the same ballpark as the React team's revised guidance. It's important to realize that not only do I have limited time to write, it also is better for readers if I try to stay focused on the topic of the article while writing it. I can sustain a pace of writing about one article of this scope a month in a month where I don't have a lot going on. There's another article like this coming in part 3, and then I have an article scheduled for the company publication that may or may not have this kind of scope.

Ultimately, the goal is to understand your fundamentals well enough that you don't just take what these people tell you as received knowledge, but pick it apart and figure out whether it's possible to use it well, and if so, whether that even looks like what experts are telling you. This is why part 1 focused on how the usage of hooks that the React team pushed violated basic fundamentals.

You get there by making sure you understand those fundamentals (there's a references section at the end of part 1 that may be a good place to start), and comparing what people say against that. It also is helpful to read the source code of open source projects and try to see how the different decisions they make make things easier or harder for themselves and developers using their projects. And how many tests they have, what they choose to test, and how easy those tests seem to be to read and modify is a great microcosm of that.