I managed to write reducer using createSlice but the action seems to be confusing.
My old reducer :
function listPeopleReducer(state = {
getPeople:{}
}, action){
switch (action.type) {
case D.LIST_PEOPLE: {
return {
...state
, getPeople:action.payload
}
}
default:{}
}
return state
}
By using createSlice from the redux toolkit, I migrated the reducer to this,
const listPeopleReducer = createSlice({
initialState:{getPeople:{}},
name:"listPeople",
reducers:{
listPeople(state,action){
return {
...state,
getPeople : action.payload
}
}
}
})
My old action, makes an api call inside it, with the help of a helper function makeApiRequest (which takes in parameters and returns the response of the api),
export function listPeople(config: any) {
return function (dispatch: any) {
makeApiRequest(config)
.then((resp) => {
dispatch({
type : D.LIST_PEOPLE,
payload : resp.data
})
})
.catch((error) => {
dispatch({
type : D.LIST_PEOPLE,
payload : error
})
})
}
}
With reduxtool kit, we could do something like,
const listPeople = listPeopleReducer.actions.listPeople;
But, how will I write my custom action that contains the helper function makeApiRequest ?
i.e The old Action should be migrated to reduxtoolkit type.
It's definitely tricky when migrating, since there are some major conceptual changes that you must eventually wrap your head around. I had to do it a couple of times before it clicked.
First, when you are creating const listPeopleReducer with createSlice(), that is not actually what you are creating. A slice is a higher level object that can generate action creators and action types for you, and allows you to export reducers and actions FROM it.
Here are the changes I would make to your code:
const peopleSlice = createSlice({
initialState:{getPeople:{}},
name:"people",
reducers:{
listPeople(state,action){
// uses immer under the hood so you can
// safely mutate state here
state.getPeople = action.payload
}
},
extraReducers:
// each thunk you create with `createAsyncThunk()` will
// automatically have: pending/fulfilled/rejected action types
// and you can listen for them here
builder =>
builder.addCase(listPeople.pending, (state,action) => {
// e.g. state.isFetching = true
})
builder.addCase(listPeople.fulfilled, (state,action) => {
// e.g. state.isFetching = false
// result will be in action.payload
})
builder.addCase(listPeople.rejected, (state,action) => {
// e.g. state.isFetching = false
// error will be in action.payload
})
}
})
Then, outside of your slice definition, you can create actions by using createAsyncThunk(), and do like:
export const listPeople = createAsyncThunk(
`people/list`,
async (config, thunkAPI) => {
try {
return makeApiRequest(config)
} catch(error) {
return thunkAPI.rejectWithError(error)
// thunkAPI has access to state and includes
// helper functions like this one
}
}
}
The "Modern Redux with Redux Toolkit" page in the Redux Fundamentals docs tutorial shows how to migrate from hand-written Redux logic to Redux Toolkit.
Your makeApiRequest function would likely be used with Redux Toolkit's createAsyncThunk, except that you should return the result and let createAsyncThunk dispatch the right actions instead of dispatching actions yourself.
Related
being rather new to react.js + redux, I'm facing the following conundrum:
I have multiple files, which need to update the store in exactly the same way, based on the stores current state. Currently I simply copy-paste the same code (along with the needed mapStateToProps), which goes again DRY.
Similar to something like the below, where getData is an Ajax call living in the actions file and props.timeAttribute is coming from mapStateToProps:
props.getData(props.timeAttribute).then((newState) => {
console.log(newState)
})
Would a function like that go in the actions file? Can the current state be read from within that actions file? Or does one normally create some sort of helperFile.js in which a function like that lives and is being called from other files?
Thanks!
If your file is executing the same action, then yes, you would put the action creator in a separate file and export it. In theory, you can put state in an action by passing the state as a parameter, but the philosophy behind an action is that it announces to your application that SOMETHING HAPPENED (as denoted by the type property on the return value of the action function). The reducer function responsible for handling that type subsequently updates the state.
You can access the current state of the store inside of an action creator like this:
export const testAction = (someParam) => {
return (dispatch, getState) => {
const {
someState,
} = getState(); //getState gets the entire state of your application
//do something with someState and then run the dispatch function like this:
dispatch(() => {type: ACTION_TYPE, payload: updatedState})
}
I like this approach because it encapsulates all the logic for accessing state inside of the one function that will need to access it.
DO NOT modify the state inside of the action creator though! This should be read only. The state of your application should only be updated through your reducer functions.
Yes, it is recommended to maintain a separate file for your actions.
Below is an example of how i use an action to fetch information and dispatch an action.
export const fetchComments = () => (dispatch) => {
console.log("Fetch Comment invoked");
/*you can use your Ajax getData call instead of fetch.
Can also add parameters if you need */
return fetch(baseUrl + 'comments')
.then(response => {
if (response.ok){
return response;
}
else {
var error = new Error('Error ' + response.status + ': ' + response.statusText);
error.response = response;
throw error;
}
},
error => {
var errmess = new Error(error.message);
throw errmess;
})
.then(response => response.json())
.then(comments => dispatch(addComments(comments)))
.catch(error => dispatch(commentsFailed(error.message)));
}
/* Maintain a separate file called ActionTypes.js where you can store all the ActionTypes as Strings. */
export const addComments = (comments) => ({
type : ActionTypes.ADD_COMMENTS,
payload : comments
});
export const comments = (errMess) => ({
type : ActionTypes.COMMENTS_FAILED,
payload : errMess
});
Once, you receive dispatch an action, you need an reducer to capture the action and make changes to your store.
Note that this reducer must be a pure function.
export const comments = (state = { errMess: null, comments:[]}, action) => {
console.log("inside comments");
switch (action.type) {
case ActionTypes.ADD_COMMENTS:
return {...state, errMess: null, comments: action.payload};
case ActionTypes.COMMENTS_FAILED:
return {...state, errMess: action.payload};
default:
return state;
}
};
Don't forget to combine the reducers in the configureStore().
const store = createStore(
combineReducers({
comments
}),
applyMiddleware(thunk,logger)
);
In your components where you use the Actions, use
const mapDispatchToProps = dispatch => ({
fetchComments : () => dispatch(fetchComments()),
})
Note to export the component as
export default connect(mapStateToProps,mapDispatchToProps)(Component);
I am using react with react-stepzilla with Redux , Redux-thunk the problem is i want to use jumpToState(n) method inside action creator. but i am not able to access this method inside redux action creator file.
Action File
export const checkUser = (username) => {
return (dispatch,getState)=>{
wApi({user:username}).then(response => {
dispatch({
type: ActionTypes.CHECK_USER_NAME,
payload:response
})
e.jumpToStep(1);//Here it is Stepzilla Method
}).catch(err => {})
}
}
getState() method only providing me state value which i declared in reducer.
console.log(getState)
userdetail:{
username:"USER1001"
usertype:"SUPER"
isactive:"YES"
}
Reducer File
const defaultState={
userdetail:{
username:""
usertype:""
isactive:""
}
}
const reducer =(state=defaultState,action)=>{
switch (action.type) {
case ActionTypes.CHECK_USER_NAME :
{
return {
...state,
userdetail:action.payload,
}
}
default:
return state
}
}
export default reducer;
CheckUserName.js File Code
componentWillMount() {
this.props.checkUser("USER1001")
//console.log(this.props)
//{Here in console Output i can see "jumpToState" method in this.props}
//this.props.jumpToStep(1);
}
I find the solution by passing whole this.props to action creator method.
this.props.checkUser("USER1001",this.props)
i want to ask there is any alternate method for achieving this. i am new to react
From the documentation of react-stepzilla:
stepzilla injects an utility method called jumpToStep as a prop into all your react step components
As it is normal function in your props, you can pass it to your action creator as an argument and use it there. Passing the whole this.props is not necessary.
this.props.checkUser("USER1001", this.props.jumpToStep)
export const checkUser = (username, jumpToStep) => {
return (dispatch,getState)=>{
wApi({user:username}).then(response => {
dispatch({
type: ActionTypes.CHECK_USER_NAME,
payload:response
})
jumpToStep(1);//Here it is Stepzilla Method
}).catch(err => {})
}
}
I'm trying to wrap my head around accessing the state inside Redux actionCreators; instead did the following (performed ajax operation in the reducer). Why do I need to access the state for this — because I want to perform ajax with a CSRF token stored in the state.
Could someone please tell me if the following is considered bad practice/anti-pattern?
export const reducer = (state = {} , action = {}) => {
case DELETE_COMMENT: {
// back-end ops
const formData = new FormData();
formData.append('csrf' , state.csrfToken);
fetch('/delete-comment/' + action.commentId , {
credentials:'include' ,
headers:new Headers({
'X-Requested-With':'XMLHttpRequest'
}) ,
method:'POST' ,
body:formData
})
// return new state
return {
...state ,
comments:state.comments.filter(comment => comment.id !== action.commentId)
};
}
default: {
return state;
}
}
From the redux documentation:
The only way to change the state is to emit an action, an object describing what happened. Do not put API calls into reducers. Reducers are just pure functions that take the previous state and an action, and return the next state. Remember to return new state objects, instead of mutating the previous state.
Actions should describe the change. Therefore, the action should contain the data for the new version of the state, or at least specify the transformation that needs to be made. As such, API calls should go into async actions that dispatch action(s) to update the state. Reducers must always be pure, and have no side effects.
Check out async actions for more information.
An example of an async action from the redux examples:
function fetchPosts(subreddit) {
return (dispatch, getState) => {
// contains the current state object
const state = getState();
// get token
const token = state.some.token;
dispatch(requestPosts(subreddit));
// Perform the API request
return fetch(`https://www.reddit.com/r/${subreddit}.json`)
.then(response => response.json())
// Then dispatch the resulting json/data to the reducer
.then(json => dispatch(receivePosts(subreddit, json)))
}
}
As per guidelines of redux.
It's very important that the reducer stays pure. Things you should never do inside a reducer:
Mutate its arguments;
Perform side effects like API calls and routing transitions;
Call non-pure functions, e.g. Date.now() or Math.random().
If you are asking whether it is anti-pattern or not then yes it is absolutely.
But if you ask what is the solution.
Here you need to dispatch async-action from your action-creators
Use "redux-thunk" or "redux-saga" for that
You can access the state and create some async action
e.g inside your action-creator ( Just for example )
export function deleteCommment(commentId) {
return dispatch => {
return Api.deleteComment(commentId)
.then( res => {
dispatch(updateCommentList(res));
});
};
}
export function updateCommentList(commentList) {
return {
type : UPDATE_COMMENT_LIST,
commentList
};
}
Edit: You can access the state -
export function deleteCommment(commentId) {
return (dispatch, getState) => {
const state = getState();
// use some data from state
return Api.deleteComment(commentId)
.then( res => {
dispatch(updateCommentList(res));
});
};
}
Recently I've been looking into react and redux. I read up the official documentation and tried some ToDo List tutorials. Part 1 is just about react and this is part 2 about redux:
http://www.theodo.fr/blog/2016/03/getting-started-with-react-redux-and-immutable-a-test-driven-tutorial-part-2/
So basically he just sets up a store and initially adds an array of a few todos. Now I don't want my data to be local and I want to fetch it from an API. I'm having a hard time understanding how this actually works. So the code I would use in my action_creators.js is:
export function fetchData() {
return dispatch => {
fetch('http://127.0.0.1:8000/example')
.then(res => res.json())
.then(res => dispatch({
type: FETCH_DATA,
data: res
}))
}
}
Now in the example code for example adding a 'todo':
export function addItem(text) {
return {
type: 'ADD_ITEM',
text
}
}
You aren't dispatching anything, the tutorial does this in the reducer? But when you return dispatch your fetch, does this automatically get dispatched to your store?
If so I have no clue what I should write in my reducer ..
This is the code I have for adding a 'todo':
import {Map} from 'immutable';
function setState(state, newState) {
return state.merge(newState);
}
function fetchData(state) {
return state;
}
function addItem(state, text) {
const itemId = state.get('hostnames').reduce((maxId, item) => Math.max(maxId,item.get('id')), 0) + 1;
const newItem = Map({id: itemId, text: text, status: 'active'});
return state.update('hostnames', (hostnames) => hostnames.push(newItem));
}
export default function(state = Map(), action) {
switch (action.type) {
case 'SET_STATE':
return setState(state, action.state);
case 'ADD_ITEM':
return addItem(state, action.text);
case 'FETCH_DATA':
return fetchData(state);
}
return state;
}
So basically my question is, how do I fetch the data ( if the fetch is wrong now ) and how do I add the fetched data from my api to the store in my reducer.
I just find react and redux pretty complicated so sorry if I'm asking a really noob question or just making big mistakes in the way I want to do something.
Thanks in advance for any help.
imagine your json
{
"data": {
"apple": 1,
"banana": 3,
},
"status": 200,
}
your actions
export function fetchData() {
return dispatch => {
fetch('http://127.0.0.1:8000/example')
.then(res => res.json())
.then((responseData) => {
if(responseData.status === 200){
dispatch(setData(responseData));
}
})
}
}
export function setData(responseData) {
return {type: SET_DATA, data: responseData.data }
}
your reducer
const initialState = { data: null };
export default function(state = initialState, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case 'SET_DATA':
return Object.assign({}, state, {
data: action.data,
})
default:
return state;
}
}
then your state will become
{ data: {
apple: 1,
banana: 3,
}
}
Actually, all your reducers should be pretty dumb and pure (without any side effects). So their only concern is to modify the state and nothing else. Fetching data from the server or any kind of orchestration should be implemented in redux middleware. Look at redux-thunk or redux-saga if you need something more complicated. Hope that helps.
Just built my first API Middleware and was just wondering where I'm suppose to chain promises for action creators that dispatch multiple actions. Is what I did an anti-pattern:
export const fetchChuck = () => {
return {
[CALL_API]: {
types: [ CHUCK_REQUEST, CHUCK_SUCCESS, CHUCK_FAILURE ],
endpoint: `jokes/random`
}
}
}
export const saveJoke = (joke) => {
return { type: SAVE_JOKE, joke: joke }
}
export const fetchAndSaveJoke = () => {
return dispatch => {
dispatch(fetchChuck()).then((response) => {
dispatch(saveJoke(response.response.value.joke))
})
}
}
Should fetchAndSaveJoke dispatch the section action in my react component or is it okay to have it as its own action creator?
I would say that at this point in the Redux world, it's not super clear what's best practice and what the anti-patterns are. It's a very unopinionated tool. While that's been great for a diverse ecosystem to flourish, it does present challenges for people looking for ways to organize their apps without running into pitfalls or excessive boilerplate. From what I can tell, your approach seems to be roughly in line with the advice from the Redux guide. The one thing that looks funny to me is that it seems like CHUCK_SUCCESS should probably make SAVE_JOKE unnecessary.
I personally find it rather awkward to have action creators dispatch more actions, and so I worked out the approach behind react-redux-controller. It's brand new, so it's certainly not a "best practice", but I'll throw it out there in case you or someone else wants to give it a try. In that workflow, you'd have a controller method that looks something like:
// actions/index.js
export const CHUCK_REQUEST = 'CHUCK_REQUEST';
export const CHUCK_SUCCESS = 'CHUCK_SUCCESS';
export const CHUCK_FAILURE = 'CHUCK_FAILURE';
export const chuckRequest = () => { type: CHUCK_REQUEST };
export const chuckSuccess = (joke) => { type: CHUCK_SUCCESS, joke };
export const chuckFailure = (err) => { type: CHUCK_FAILURE, err };
// controllers/index.js
import fetch from 'isomorphic-fetch'; // or whatever
import * as actions from '../actions';
const controllerGenerators = {
// ... other controller methods
*fetchAndSaveJoke() {
const { dispatch } = yield getProps;
// Trigger a reducer to set a loading state in your store, which the UI can key off of
dispatch(actions.chuckRequest());
try {
const response = yield fetch('jokes/random');
dispatch(actions.chuckSuccess(response.response.value.joke));
} catch(err) {
dispatch(actions.chuckFailure(err));
}
},
};