`Erasing state when props change` shouldn't be called "Anti-pattern"

If we rename mail to defaultMail in that example, I think the component's behavior makes sense. And this pattern also has no conflict with Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 both. Even it's more convenient, because we don't have to update id or key when passing a new default value.
In fact， this pattern doesn't cause any new problem.

從標題為 "Erasing state when props change" 的文件範例開始，並將其措辭與 Alternative 1 和 Alternative 2 進行比較。檢查該範例是否應使用 defaultMail，以及將此模式稱為反模式是否準確；當範例和指引反映出已達成共識的術語時，即視為完成。