react-redux together with components status - react-redux

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 :)

Related

Jest store state and RTL rendered component's onClick event handler different states

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.

How to reset wizard style redux form?

I am using the example http://redux-form.com/6.0.5/examples/wizard/ to accomplish my own form.
But how can I reset the first and second form when I use the wizard style form?
You can clear your form by calling dispatch(reset('myForm')); after you have submitted the data ideally at the parent component.
You can read more about it here
https://redux-form.com/6.7.0/docs/faq/howtoclear.md/
The tricky part is to make sure that dispatch is available at the component where you are submit (aka the parent component).
One way to do that is to wrap your parent component with connect(). After that, your component will receive a dispatch function as a prop. You can then use
this.props.dispatch.
This works for me
submitForm(values) {
const { dispatch } = this.props
axios.post(`YOUR_URL_HERE`, values)
.then(response => {
console.log(response.data)
dispatch(reset('MY_FORM'));
})
.catch(error => {
console.log("Unexpected error", error);
});
}

react-redux can update child smart components without updating parents?

Imagine the following React structure:
SmartComponentA -> DumbComponentB -> SmartComponentC
Also imagine that SmartComponentA and SmartComponentC each get connected to different slices of the state in their mapStateToProps functions.
Lastly, imagine that we put a console.log in the render method of each of these components.
When I actually try this, on the first render, I see that all components log as expected. But then if I change the data for SmartComponentC, I only see a single log message (C's log message), and I don't see SmartComponentA or DumbComponentB logging anything. How is that possible? How is react-redux getting React to update a child without updating its parents?
I would have assumed that the overriding of shouldComponentUpdate inside of the connect method would mean SmartComponentA would not get re-rendered (since its slice of the state didn't change), and therefore would cause a short-circuiting that would prevent SmartComponentC from getting re-rendered. While connect's implementation is not the same as the pure render mixin, both work by changing shouldComponentUpdate, but the pure render docs clearly state that React will "bail out" (as they put it) if a parent doesn't need to re-render:
for C2's subtree and C7, it didn't even have to compute the virtual DOM as we bailed out on shouldComponentUpdate.
source
If my question still isn't clear, here is sort of pseudo-code for the setup, and I'm asking why I can keep typing in C's input and it only log's C's messages to the console and not A's and B's (why is it not short-circuiting)?
//////////////////////////////////////////////
const SmartComponentA = (props) => {
console.log('rendering SmartComponentA');
return <DumbComponentB bData={props.bData} />;
};
const mapStateToProps = (state) => { bData: state.bData };
export default connect(mapStateToProps)(SmartComponentA);
//////////////////////////////////////////////
const DumbComponentB = (props) => {
console.log('rendering DumbComponentB');
return (
<div>
{props.bData}
<SmartComponentC />
</div>
);
}
export default DumbComponentB;
//////////////////////////////////////////////
const SmartComponentC = (props) => {
console.log('rendering SmartComponentC');
return (
<div>
<input value={props.cValue} onChange={props.changeCValue} />
</div>
);
}
const mapStateToProps = (state) => { cValue: state.cValue };
export default connect(mapStateToProps, { changeCValue })(SmartComponentC);
//////////////////////////////////////////////
On the first render I see all log messages, then if I keep typing in the input, I only see C's log message each time I press a key.
Prop changes trigger the React component lifecycle which will typically trigger the lifecycle of each child component unless -- as you observe, the process can be short-circuited by shouldComponentUpdate.
But prop changes aren't they only thing that triggers the component lifecycle -- state changes do too. And that's how connect function works. The Connect component subscribes to the store and on any store change checks to see if it will update the smart component's props (based on mapStateToProps). If so it will set it's own state triggering the lifecycle functions for the Connect component and it's child.

Which component should control the loading state of a lower component?

Let's say I have these components:
Translator
TranslationList
Translator determines translation context, has translate function.
TranslationList must show these "visual states": loading, result list, no results.
The Translator moves around the page (one instance): on focusing an input, it moves "below" it and gives a dropdown with suggestion.
So each time it moves, it has to:
Show that it's loading translations
Show translation list or no results message.
So my question is:
Which component should control the "loading" visual state?
If the Translator component controls it, it has to pass loading=true translations=[] as props to Translation list. Then later it has to rerender it again with new props loading=false translations=[...]. This seems a bit counter-intuitive, because loading feels like the state of the TranslationList component.
If we the TranslationList component has loading state, then it also has to have a way to translate things, meaning that I have to pass translate function as prop. I would then hold translations and loading as state. This all gets a bit messy, since it must now also receive string to translate, context.
I also don't want to have separate components for loading message, no results message. I'd rather keep these inside the TranslationList, because these 3 share that same wrapper <div class="list-group"></div>
Perhaps there should be one more Component in between these two components, responsible only for fetching translation data?
Translator component should control the loading state of a lower component list component. hold the loading and translating logic but with help by wrapping it in a high order component where you should put most of the logic. link for HOC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymJOm5jY1tQ.
const translateSelected = wrappedComponent =>
//return Translator component
class extends React.Component {
state = {translatedText: [], loading:true}
componentDidMount(){
fetch("text to translate")
.then(transText => this.setState({translatedText: transText, loading: false}))
}
render() {
const {translatedText} = this.state
return <WrappedComponent {..this.props} {...translatedText}
}
}
const Translator_HOC = translateSelected(Translator);
You could introduce a Higher Order Component to control the switching of the loading state and the TranslationList. That way you separate the loading display away from your TranslationList as being it's concern. This also allows you to use the HOC in other areas.
The Translator can act as "container" component which does the data fetching/passing.
For example:
// The Loadable HOC
function Loadable(WrappedComponent) {
return function LoadableComponent({ loaded, ...otherProps }) {
return loaded
? <WrappedComponent {...otherProps} />
: <div>Loading...</div>
}
}
// Translation list doesn't need to know about "loaded" prop
function TranslationList({ translations }) {
return (
<ul>
{
translations.map((translation, index) =>
<li key={index}>{translation}</li>
)
}
</ul>
)
}
// We create our new composed component here.
const LoadableTranslationList = Loadable(TranslationList)
class Translator extends React.Component {
state = {
loaded: false,
translations: []
}
componentDidMount() {
// Let's simulate a data fetch, typically you are going to access
// a prop like this.props.textToTranslate and then pass that to
// an API or redux action to fetch the respective translations.
setTimeout(() => {
this.setState({
loaded: true,
translations: [ 'Bonjour', 'Goddag', 'Hola' ]
});
}, 2000);
}
render() {
const { loaded, translations } = this.state;
return (
<div>
<h3>Translations for "{this.props.textToTranslate}"</h3>
<LoadableTranslationList loaded={loaded} translations={translations} />
</div>
)
}
}
ReactDOM.render(<Translate textToTranslate="Hello" />)
Running example here: http://www.webpackbin.com/NyQnWe54W

Encapsulation with React child components

How should one access state (just state, not the React State) of child components in React?
I've built a small React UI. In it, at one point, I have a Component displaying a list of selected options and a button to allow them to be edited. Clicking the button opens a Modal with a bunch of checkboxes in, one for each option. The Modal is it's own React component. The top level component showing the selected options and the button to edit them owns the state, the Modal renders with props instead. Once the Modal is dismissed I want to get the state of the checkboxes to update the state of the parent object. I am doing this by using refs to call a function on the child object 'getSelectedOptions' which returns some JSON for me identifying those options selected. So when the Modal is selected it calls a callback function passed in from the parent which then asks the Modal for the new set of options selected.
Here's a simplified version of my code
OptionsChooser = React.createClass({
//function passed to Modal, called when user "OK's" their new selection
optionsSelected: function() {
var optsSelected = this.refs.modal.getOptionsSelected();
//setState locally and save to server...
},
render: function() {
return (
<UneditableOptions />
<button onClick={this.showModal}>Select options</button>
<div>
<Modal
ref="modal"
options={this.state.options}
optionsSelected={this.optionsSelected}
/>
</div>
);
}
});
Modal = React.createClass({
getOptionsSelected: function() {
return $(React.findDOMNode(this.refs.optionsselector))
.find('input[type="checkbox"]:checked').map(function(i, input){
return {
normalisedName: input.value
};
}
);
},
render: function() {
return (
//Modal with list of checkboxes, dismissing calls optionsSelected function passed in
);
}
});
This keeps the implementation details of the UI of the Modal hidden from the parent, which seems to me to be a good coding practice. I have however been advised that using refs in this manner may be incorrect and I should be passing state around somehow else, or indeed having the parent component access the checkboxes itself. I'm still relatively new to React so was wondering if there is a better approach in this situation?
Yeah, you don't want to use refs like this really. Instead, one way would be to pass a callback to the Modal:
OptionsChooser = React.createClass({
onOptionSelect: function(data) {
},
render: function() {
return <Modal onClose={this.onOptionSelect} />
}
});
Modal = React.createClass({
onClose: function() {
var selectedOptions = this.state.selectedOptions;
this.props.onClose(selectedOptions);
},
render: function() {
return ();
}
});
I.e., the child calls a function that is passed in via props. Also the way you're getting the selected options looks over-fussy. Instead you could have a function that runs when the checkboxes are ticked and store the selections in the Modal state.
Another solution to this problem could be to use the Flux pattern, where your child component fires off an action with data and relays it to a store, which your top-level component would listen to. It's a bit out of scope of this question though.

Resources