How justified are the comments on the test task?

Question

JavaScript

I recently completed a test job for a js developer and was rejected with the following remarks:
1) You need to use Redux
2) you don’t need to clone objects
3) out of place using PureComponent where it’s better to use a functional component
4) using legacy context
5) inline functions
6) Working with storage is not wrapped in a try catch
7) state can only be changed via setState
The code can be viewed here: https://github.com/regulyarniy/planner
The task itself: https://docs.google.com/document/d /1YrXEhzXuuij8H0...
My remarks about each item that I have formulated for myself at the moment (probably I'm wrong):
1) there was no word about redux in the task, I used the context. And for such a project, is redux really needed? Of course, I understand that this is a de facto standard, but in this case it seems to me that this is an overhead
2) objects were cloned in order not to mutate the state
3) in this case it is a matter of personal style preferences. if the essence of the remark is optimization - then you need to measure and look on the spot, which is faster - functional components can slow down the application no worse than PureComponent if used incorrectly
4) there is no legacy context api in the code
5) again, a matter of personal style preferences and premature optimization
6) I agree with remark
7) there are no state mutations in the code directly
An experienced developer on the part of the employer, of course, knows better - after all, who he can work with later partially depends on his decision (perhaps, for example, there were other comments, but the person was too lazy to describe everything). My question is - how adequate are these comments and which of them should be taken at face value? I just would like to understand what work to do on the bugs, and what is not particularly justified.

Answer 1

Don’t worry, this is a common situation, this is most likely the case when a project fails, the management is looking for a way out of the crisis, they offer candidates to some leader, and he rests and weeds out everyone so that everything depends on him. And if you also show you knowledge in general, the road is closed there. In extreme cases, a very loyal jun may appear there, on whom they will then hang the responsibility for the entire fakap (like it is impossible to find specialists better than him). And by and large, nothing can be done here until everything bursts, and they change everyone along with the lead.