when submitting remix form with <Form>element i can't clear inputs after submit. In my particular case, that form is sitting on child route within <Outlet /> component (using nested routes here)
When form is submitted, all is working fine, redirect in handler goes to parent, parent is refreshing but child doesn't and inputs remains with values entered, that's a problem.
form is quite regular, inputs and button, all manages action function in parent
export const action: ActionFunction = async ({ request }) => {
const formData = await request.formData()
const data = Object.fromEntries(formData)
await doSomething(data)
return redirect('/route/add')
}
When instead of remix <Form/>element i use regular <form> element (its the only change) - total form refresh happen - and its also working, but extra request processing, and is impossible to use tasty remix hooks, like useTransition
how i cut the corner
const submit = useSubmit()
function submitHandler(evt) {
evt.preventDefault()
// total shame
evt.target.title.value = ''
evt.target.body.value = ''
submit(evt.target, {
action: '/route/add',
method: 'post',
})
}
so question is: how clear inputs after submitting ?
This is actually more of a React question instead of a Remix one.
Remix doesn't unmount your Outlet on navigation.
Remix is simply fetching data from your loaders and React is then rendering. As you know, initial state and default value do not get reset on re-render. The component must unmount. The simplest way is to update the key prop to trigger React to remount.
Related
I'm using the following code to test a state-dependent react component using jest and rtl:
test("render author, date and image correctly after going next post", async () => {
const store = configureStore({
reducer: {
data: dataReducer
}
});
const Wrapper = ({ children }) => (
<Provider store={store}>{children}</Provider>
);
render(<Post />, { wrapper: Wrapper });
const getSpy = jest.spyOn(axios, 'get').mockReturnValue(mockPostJSON);
await store.dispatch(FETCH_POSTS());
expect(getSpy).toBeCalledWith('https://www.reddit.com/r/EarthPorn/.json');
const beforeClick = await screen.findByTestId('authorAndDate');
expect(beforeClick.innerHTML.toString()).toBe(mockPostsList[0].author + ' - ' + mockPostsList[0].date);
fireEvent.click(screen.getByText('Next post'));
const afterClick = await screen.findByTestId('authorAndDate');
expect(afterClick.innerHTML.toString()).toBe(mockPostsList[1].author + ' - ' + mockPostsList[1].date);
})
The problem I'm having is that before the click everything in the store is set up correctly and the authorAndDate element displays the first item in the array of posts. But after the click is fired the store goes back to the initial state it had before loading the mock data. I checked within the component's event handler and right before it does anything the state has been reset. The code is as follows:
const handleNextClick = () => {
store.dispatch(GO_NEXT_POST());
store.dispatch(FETCH_COMMENTS());
}
I've been an hour over the code trying to find something that would reset the state and found nothing. I'm guessing it's some kind of interaction between jest and rtl but I can't figure out why the store in the test has one state and the store in the component's event handler has another :S
Well, figured it out. Can't use store.dispatch directly as it's accessing a stale state. Needed to use the useDispatch hook. Hope this serves anybody who faces the same problem in the future.
I am not allowed to answer questions yet, but I feel that since this issue has taken me some days to resolve, I should post the solution the only way I can - as a question.
If you have a better solution then please include that in your reply.
Until an element is rendered it is not in the DOM so if you add an event listener to the element in your code you will get an error (element value null).
But you can add a listener to the root element, which is always there. WHen the event is triggered you can then retrieve the className and ID of the element involved in your event-handler.
Code:
var rootElement = document.getElementById('root');
console.log(rootElement);
rootElement.addEventListener('click', rootElementClicked);
console.log('event listener added to root element');
function rootElementClicked(event) {
event.preventDefault();
const { name, value } = event.target;
console.log("Root element clicked with [" + event.target.className, event.target.id);
}
/code
So, the event-listener is app-wide, so a click anywhere will call the event-handler function. Then in the code for that function, the element class and ID will tell you what was clicked.
Note the event.preventDefault(); line - it prevents a refresh of the web page, otherwise the target class & ID are returned as "undefined"
In React you shouldn't need to addEventListener manually since you can use onClick. However if you would like to manually attach click handler on an HTML element in React you can use React Ref. If you pass a ref object to React with <div ref={myRef} /> React will set its .current property to the corresponding DOM node whenever that node changes.
Example: https://codesandbox.io/s/react-hooks-useref-xfvlb
const App = () => {
const elementRef = useRef();
useEffect(() => {
elementRef.current.addEventListener('click', handleOnClick);
},[elementRef])
const handleOnClick = () => {
alert("click")
}
return (
<div className="App">
<div ref={elementRef}>
click on me
</div>
</div>
);
}
in a react UI I have a table component. You can edit one row of the table by clicking a edit button or you can add a new record by clicking a "new-record-button". When clicking the edit button an redux-action is triggered which takes the row and sets a visible property of a modal dialog. When the "new-record-button" is clicked an action is triggered which creates a new empty data item and the same modal dialog is triggered.
In the modal dialog I have several text components with onChange method.
in this onChange-method the data-item is written.
When to user clicks a save-button the edited dataItem is saved to the database.
So my code looks like:
const mapStateToProps = (state) => ({
dataItem: state.datItemToEdit || {},
...
});
...
handleTextChange(event) {
const {
dataItem
} = this.props;
const id = event.target.id;
const text = event.target.value;
switch (id) {
case 'carId': {
dataItem.carId = text;
break;
}
...
}
this.forceUpdate();
}
...
<TextField
...
onChange={event => this.handleTextChange(event)}
/>
I have several question regarding this approach. First I do not understand why in handleTextChange we can write to dataItem. It does work apparently.
dataItem.carId is set in the example code but I thought
const {dataItem} = this.props;
gives us a local read-only variable dataItem just to read from the props...
Next thing I think is a poor design. After reading in a book about react I think we should not write to props but only set a state.
In my example I get the the dataItem from the redux-state. The mapStateToProps maps it to the (read-only) props of the component, right?!. But I want to EDIT it. So I would have to copy it to the state of my component?
But where to do it?
Once in the state of my component I could simply call this.setState for the various text-fields and the component would render and I could abstain from forceUpdate(), right?!
Can someone explain how the redux status plays together with the component status and props for this example?
In redux or react, you shouldn't write to the props directly because you should keep your props as immutable. Redux forces us to use immutable state because state is a source of truth for the application. If the reference to state changes then only your app should render. If you'll mutate your state (objects) then the references don't get changed and your app doesn't know whether some state has been changed or not. React/Redux doesn't give you read-only objects automatically. You can mutate them anytime but as I told you, it can cause problems that Your app won't know when to re-render. If you want to have this read-only property inherently, you should probably use immutable.js
About your second question that you'll have to copy the props to the component's state and where you should do it. You should do it in the constructor of the component and you should use immutibility helper
import React from React;
import update from 'immutibility-helper';
class Modal extends React.Component {
constructor(props){
this.state = {
dataItem: dataItem,
};
}
...other methods
handleTextChange(event) {
const {
dataItem
} = this.props;
const id = event.target.id;
const text = event.target.value;
switch (id) {
case 'carId': {
this.props.updateItem(this.state.dataItem, text); //fire a redux action to update state in redux
this.setState(update(this.state, {
dataItem: {
carId: {$set: text},
}
});
break;
}
...
}
}
}
You wouldn't have to do forceUpdate in such case because the reference to state will change and the component will re-render itself.
Also, you can use forceUpdate in your application but personally I don't find it a great idea because when React/Redux is giving you the flow of state, by using forceUpdate, you're breaking the flow.
The last question is how redux and react state plays together. That is also a matter of choice. If I have a app level state, e.g., in your case you've some app level data, you should put that in your redux state and if you have a component level things, such as opening a modal or opening a third pane. That's the convention I follow but that can really depend on how you want to exploit react and redux state.
Also, in above code, I put the redux state in component state too (because you asked where to put that) but Ideally you should fire a redux action and update in redux state. In this way, you will restrict yourself from state duplication in react and redux.
import React from React;
import {updateItem} from './actions';
class Modal extends React.Component {
...other methods
handleTextChange(event) {
const {
dataItem
} = this.props;
const id = event.target.id;
const text = event.target.value;
switch (id) {
case 'carId': {
this.props.updateItem(this.props.dataItem, text); //fire a redux action to update state in redux
break;
}
...
}
}
}
const mapStateToProps = (state) => ({
dataItem: getDataItem(state), //get Data Item gets Data from redux state
});
export default connect(mapStateToProps, {updateItem: updateItem})(Modal);
in Actions:
updateItem = (dataItem, text) => dispatch => {
dispatch({type: 'UPDATE_ITEM', payLoad: {dataItem, text});
};
in Reducer:
export default (state = {}, action) => {
switch(action){
case 'UPDATE_ITEM': {
return {
...state,
dataItem: {
...action.dataItem,
carId: action.text,
}
};
}
}
}
In this way, your state will be pure and you don't have to worry about immutibility.
EDIT:
As constructor will be called only once, you should probably use componentWillReceiveProps so that whenever you render the component, you get the next updated props of the component. You can check whether the carId of dataItem is same or not and then update the state.
componentWillReceiveProps(nextProps){
if(nextProps.dataItem.carId !== this.props.dataItem.carId){
this.setState({dataItem: nextProps.dataItem});
}
}
You should only use redux when you want different, unrelated components in your app to know and share the specific state.
e.g. - When a user logs in to your app, you might want all components to know that user so you'll connect your different containers to the user reducer and then propagate the user to the components.
Sounds like in this case you have a classic use case for using the inner state.
You can use the parent of all TextFields to maintain all rows, edit them by index, etc.
Once you start using redux, it's really easy to make the mistake of transferring the entire state of the components to the reducers, I've been there and stopped doing it a while ago :)
I'm trying to experiment here. I want to build a component that auto populates some data from an ajax request after mounting. Something like this:
var AjaxComponent = React.createClass({
getInitialState: function() {
return {
data: {}
};
},
render: function() {
return (
<div>
{this.state.data.text}
</div>
);
},
componentDidMount: function() {
makeAjaxResquest(this.props.url).then(function(response){
this.setState({
data: response.body // or something
});
}.bind(this));
}
});
With that example component, I'd use <AjaxComponent url="/url/to/fetch" /> to display the content.
Now, what if I'd like to access different bits of data from children elements? Can I do something like this?
<AjaxComponent url="/url/to/fetch">
<div>
<header>{RESPONSE.title}</header>
<div>
{RESPONSE.text}
</div>
</div>
</AjaxComponent>
No problem if it doesn't render anything before the ajax request ends. The thing is how could I pass the data for children to render, not as props. Is it possible?
I had a similar scenario where I had similar Components that would query data from different APIs. Assuming you know the expected response from a given API, you could do it the same way perhaps.
Essentially make a generic Component where it props functions as an "API" of sorts, then define different types of sub components and their associated render function.
For example:
In widget, you then do something like this, where widgets is just a plain javascript file with a bunch of functions:
componentDidMount: widgets[type].componentDidMount(),
render: widgets[type].render().
In widgets, it would be like this:
var widgets = {
widget1: {
componentDidMount: function () {
//Ajax call..
},
render: function() {
//How should I draw?
}
},
widget2: //Same format, different functions
Then in some parent component you simply go
< Widget type="widget1" \>
or whatever.
There are a couple weird things about this that probably don't sit right with React. First off, you should take state all the way up to the top-level component, so I wouldn't do my ajax calls in componentDidMount...I'd more likely get the data I want for the widgets I want to render at a higher level, then pass that in as a prop too if it won't change until I make another API call (thinking Flux style flow here). Then, just pass in the data as a prop as well and just specify the render functions:
< Widget data={this.state.data[0]} type=widget1 />
The "gotcha" here is that you are making an assumption that whatever is in this data prop will match what you need in the widget type. I would pass in an object, and then validate it all in the render function etc.
That's one way. Not sure if it's valid, I'm sure someone who knows more could pick it apart but it suited my use case and I now have a library of similar components that I can selectively render by passing in data and a type, then looking up the appropriate render function and checking to make sure the data object contains everything I need to render.
I have a page of products and for each of them, I want to have a form that uses AJAX to update the session. I've done this bit - just providing background.
I use the product's ID to create a different form class and name for each form, so each form is called something like this_form_name_567 and the next would be this_form_name_568 and so on.
There is a submit button per form. I'm having trouble figuring out
Which event is best to use so that the correct form will be identified when a submit button is clicked?
Once clicked, how to then make sure the correct value is taken from a hidden field (unique ID) within the submitted form so that I can populate a line of code such as:
$.post("compare_response.php", {compare_this: $("#compare_this").val()}, function(data){
}
You can use the .closest tree traversal method to get the form in which the button of interest is nested:
$("input[type=submit]").click(function() {
alert($(this).closest("form").attr("id"));
});
or even simpler, just get the element's form property :)
$("input[type=submit]").click(function() {
alert(this.form.id);
});
You can try it out here.
You can get the form you are submitting like this:
$('form').submit(function() {
var yourForm = $(this);
var hiddenValue = $(this).find('input[type=hidden]').val();
});
Of course you can get the hidden value differently, or if you have more than one hidden you'll have to give a little more information about it.