Currently I have the below reducer switch statement. All it does is toggles the state of Sidebar, so first it shows then hides then shows. It's easy.
switch(action.type) {
case 'SIDEBAR_DISPLAY_TOGGLE':
return {
...state,
Sidebar : {
...state.Sidebar,
Display : !state.Sidebar.Display
}
}
default:
return state;
}
Now I have a input field like here
that people can type to search account. I am trying to set up Redux so when user types, it gets saved to the Redux global state and I can pull it from another component. I have this reducer code set up for it but I don't know how can I pull what user types into this reducer from that component?
function reducer(state = initialState, action) {
switch(action.type) {
case 'ACCOUNT_SEARCH':
return {
...state,
AccountNumberSearch : {
...state.AccountNumberSearch,
AccountNumber : ''
}
}
default:
return state;
}
}
}
An action is just an object with a string value named type. Any other properties on this object will also be passed, so you use this to pass the typed text.
If you're using a function to create your actions, something along the lines of:
export function accountNumberSearch(accountNumber) {
return { type: 'ACCOUNT_SEARCH', accountNumber };
}
Then in your reducer, you'll be able to assign the value in the state to action.accountNumber.
AccountNumberSearch : {
...state.AccountNumberSearch,
AccountNumber : action.accountNumber,
}
Then you can map your state to props as you normally would (as you did for the sidebar toggle).
Also, as an aside, you should look into modularising your reducers with combineReducers - Docs
This would be much easier than the way you're doing it.
EDIT: Handling the changes
First of all, you'd want to wire up your input field for the search box to an onChange listener. If you do this like onChange={this.onSearchChange} you can get the value from event in the function:
onSearchChange = event => {
this.props.AccountNumberSearch(event.target.value);
}
Then in mapDispatchToProps you'd send your action + the passed value to dispatch:
const mapDispatchToProps = dispatch => {
return {
AccountNumberSearch: AccountNumber => dispatch(importedActions.AccountNumberSearch(AccountNumber)),
}
}
Then, in the component you want to RECEIVE this value, you'd map the redux state to props, like:
const mapStateToProps = state => {
return {
AccountNumber: state.AccountNumberSearch.AccountNumber,
}
}
Then you can access that value in your render function by calling this.props.AccountNumber.
If you need to do something when this value changes, you can always listen on componentDidUpdate, and compare the value with the old one - if it changed, call whatever function that you need to do.
Related
I am new to redux and I was testing it by creating a theme toggler and a counter.
the problem is everytime i click to increment the counter that works fine but when i try to toggle the dark theme the count resets to 0 and vice versa. I am using combineReducers which holds the themeReducer and counterReducer.
Why is the counter getting reset on state change? what am i doing wrong?
here is some code:
Actions:
export function increment() {
return {
type: 'INCREMENT',
};
}
export function decrement() {
return {
type: 'DECREMENT',
};
}
//different file
export function darkTheme() {
return {
type: 'DARK',
};
}
Reducers:
export default function counterReducer(state = 0, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case 'INCREMENT':
return state + 1;
case 'DECREMENT':
return state - 1;
default:
return 0;
}
}
//different file
export default function themeReducer(state = false, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case 'DARK':
return !state;
default:
return false;
}
}
im calling it like this :
const dispatch = useDispatch();
<button onClick={() => dispatch(increment())}> +</button>
You have to always return state in the default case, in both reducers: every reducer will always be called with every action, so they have to do no modification to the existing state in the default case.
All that said, I want to make you aware that you are learning "vanilla redux" here, which is not the recommended style of redux for production use any more. So while that is great to get an understanding of the underlying concepts, you should not really write code like this in the end. Please follow the official redux tutorials to get an understanding on how to write modern redux. (The fundamentals tutorial will get you started with the style you are using right now and then move into more modern territory, the essentials tutorial will start directly with modern redux - both ways are valid for learning redux)
I have a reducer for storing preferences. It has two action types. One for loading in all preferences from database and another for updating a single preference. I have a working standalone example but it breaks once used inside of my app.
The issue is that my preferences reducer only handles two types of actions, while my app has multiple reducers that fire other actions. A solution to get the code running is to add a third general type for actions not related to this reducer. That however creates Property not found in 'object type'. errors when I try to access properties of the action.
Working flow example
// #flow
const LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS = 'LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS';
const UPDATE_PREF = 'UPDATE_PREF';
type aType = {
+type: string
};
export type actionType = {
+type: typeof LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS,
prefs: Array<{_id: string, value: any}>
} | {
+type: typeof UPDATE_PREF,
id: string,
value: any
};
export default (state: {} = {}, action: actionType) => {
if (action.type === LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS) {
action.prefs.forEach(p => {
console.log(p);
});
}
switch (action.type) {
case LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS: {
const newState = {};
action.prefs.forEach(p => {
newState[p._id] = p.value;
});
return newState;
}
case UPDATE_PREF: {
return { ...state, [action.id]: action.value };
}
default:
return state;
}
};
This is valid flow but when the app actually runs, I get an error when an action with type INIT_APP or something runs. The error says action must be one of: and then it lists the two types I have in actionType as the expected and an actual of { type: string }.
I can get the app running by adding a third type to actionType like this:
export type actionType = {
+type: typeof LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS,
prefs: Array<{_id: string, value: any}>
} | {
+type: typeof UPDATE_PREF,
id: string,
value: any
} | {
+type: string
};
Even though the app now runs without error, it does not pass flow type check. Throwing errors of Property not found in object type. Here is an example on flow.org
Since every reducer ends up seeing every action, you'll want the type of this reducer function to include all the possible actions in your app. I usually define a single variant actionType with everything available in the app and use that in every reducer.
The reason why your last code example doesn't work is because the third, anonymous action type {type: string} is too vague. Before this, Flow could look at the two options in the action, and see that it would know which one was which based on the case statements. But with the third action type, an action like {type: "LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS"} would match the third case in the type. So testing action.type === LOAD_PREFS_SUCCESS is no longer enough to prove that the action will have a prefs key.
So there are two ways to fix this:
If you change your action type to be more specific and include all the specific action types, your reducer should go back to type-checking.
Otherwise, add a dummy case, like | {type: "NOT-REAL"} so that Flow forces your reducer to have a default case for actions it doesn't understand.
I've seen the argument for separating actions and reducers because they have a many-to-many relationship.
I don't think that actually applies in Redux though. Because there's only 1 datastore, actions to reducers should be 1-to-many.
Typically reducers apply to a specific change for a specific datastore.
MY_ACTION = "MY_ACTION"
function reducer(state, action) {
switch(action.type) {
case MY_ACTION: // stuff with my action to create new state
default: return state
}
}
We can combine multiple reducers with combineReducers so why not define the handler for an action with the action itself.
For instance
class Action {
constructor(type) {
this.type = type
this.handlers = []
}
add_handler(handler) {
this.handlers += handler
}
get_reducer() {
reducer = combineReducers(this.handlers)
return (state, action) => {
if(action.type == this.type) {
return reducer(state, action)
}
return state
}
}
}
With the "ducks" pattern, we end up putting the main reducers in the same module as the action declaration.
Is there any reason to keep reducers + actions separate with redux?
The main reason for separating the action creators from the reducer function is that the reducer function must be a pure function. If you wanted to do something in an action creator, like an asynchronous API call for instance, then you could not put this in the reducer. There's a great explanation on this here.
What I want is the root reducer combine other reducers, and listen to extra actions. I've find the docs, but I can not get any information.
Here is some pseudo code.
const root1 = combineReducers({
reducer1,
reducer2,
reducer3,
reducer4
});
function root2(state = initState, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case LOAD_DATA:
return _.assign({}, initState, action.data);
default:
return state;
}
}
merge(root1, root2);
The only way I figure out is to drop combineReducers:
function root(state = initState, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case LOAD_DATA:
return _.assign({}, initState, action.data);
case ...: return ...;
case ...: return ...;
case ...: return ...;
default: return state;
}
}
Is there another way to implement this?
Yes, you can use combineReducers() with multiple reducers while also having an action that rebuilds your entire application state. Admittedly, that is a bit of a strange design decision and does not scale very well with more complex apps, but you obviously have a use-case. If you want to do something like that you have two choices.
Option 1: Divide up action
It is totally valid to listen for the same action type within multiple reducer functions. This is the most straightforward approach, although it involves more repetition. You would just break out each piece of state returned by your action into the individual reducer functions it applies to.
For instance, if this was your entire application state
{
foo: {},
bar: {}
}
And your action type that rebuilt the entire application state was LOAD_DATA, you could do this
function foo (state = {}, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case 'LOAD_DATA':
return {...state, action.result.foo}
}
}
function bar (state = {}, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case 'LOAD_DATA':
return {...state, action.result.bar}
}
}
const root = combineReducers({
foo,
bar
});
With that, both foo and bar in your state would always get rebuilt with the corresponding data coming from the same action.
Option 2: Build Custom combineReducers()
There is nothing stopping you from building your own version of combineReducers(). If you watch this video on building a combineReducers() function from scratch, you'll see that the logic in place is not that complicated. You would just have to listen for the specific action type and return the entire state from that action if it matched. Here's a version of that I built by looking at the current source for combineReducers() and then working the 2 util functions into that function
function combineReducers(reducers) {
var fn = (val) => typeof val === 'function';
var finalReducers = Object.keys(reducers).reduce((result, key) => {
if (fn(reducers[key])) {
result[key] = reducers[key]
}
return result
}, {});
return function combination(state = {}, action) {
if (action.type === 'LOAD_DATA') {
return completeStateReducer(action)
} else {
var hasChanged = false
var fn = (reducer, key) => {
var previousStateForKey = state[key]
var nextStateForKey = reducer(previousStateForKey, action)
if (typeof nextStateForKey === 'undefined') {
var errorMessage = getUndefinedStateErrorMessage(key, action)
throw new Error(errorMessage)
}
hasChanged = hasChanged || nextStateForKey !== previousStateForKey
return nextStateForKey
}
var finalState = Object.keys(finalReducers).reduce((result, key) => {
result[key] = fn(finalReducers[key], key)
return result
}, {})
return hasChanged ? finalState : state
}
}
}
function completeStateReducer(action) {
return action.result;
}
Outside of merging those util functions back in, the only thing I really added was the bit about listening for the LOAD_DATA action type and then calling completeStateReducer() when that happens instead of combining the other reducer functions. Of course, this assumes that your LOAD_DATA action actually returns your entire state, but even if it doesn't, this should point you in the right direction of building out your own solution.
First, combineReducers is merely a utility function that simplifies the common use case of "this reducer function should handle updates to this subset of data". It's not required.
Second, that looks like pretty much the exact use case for https://github.com/acdlite/reduce-reducers. There's an example here: https://github.com/reactjs/redux/issues/749#issuecomment-164327121
export default reduceReducers(
combineReducers({
router: routerReducer,
customers,
stats,
dates,
filters,
ui
}),
// cross-cutting concerns because here `state` is the whole state tree
(state, action) => {
switch (action.type) {
case 'SOME_ACTION':
const customers = state.customers;
const filters = state.filters;
// ... do stuff
}
}
);
Also, I give an example of using reduceReducers in the "Structuring Reducers" section of the Redux docs: http://redux.js.org/docs/recipes/reducers/BeyondCombineReducers.html .
I'm new to using redux, and I'm trying to set up redux-promise as middleware. I have this case I can't seem to get to work (things work for me when I'm just trying to do one async call without chaining)
Say I have two API calls:
1) getItem(someId) -> {attr1: something, attr2: something, tagIds: [...]}
2) getTags() -> [{someTagObject1}, {someTagObject2}]
I need to call the first one, and get an item, then get all the tags, and then return an object that contains both the item and the tags relating to that item.
Right now, my action creator is like this:
export function fetchTagsForItem(id = null, params = new Map()) {
return {
type: FETCH_ITEM_INFO,
payload: getItem(...) // some axios call
.then(item => getTags() // gets all tags
.then(tags => toItemDetails(tags.data, item.data)))
}
}
I have a console.log in toItemDetails, and I can see that when the calls are completed, we eventually get into toItemDetails and result in the right information. However, it looks like we're getting to the reducer before the calls are completed, and I'm just getting an undefined payload from the reducer (and it doesn't try again). The reducer is just trying to return action.payload for this case.
I know the chained calls aren't great, but I'd at least like to see it working. Is this something that can be done with just redux-promise? If not, any examples of how to get this functioning would be greatly appreciated!
I filled in your missing code with placeholder functions and it worked for me - my payload ended up containing a promise which resolved to the return value of toItemDetails. So maybe it's something in the code you haven't included here.
function getItem(id) {
return Promise.resolve({
attr1: 'hello',
data: 'data inside item',
tagIds: [1, 3, 5]
});
}
function getTags(tagIds) {
return Promise.resolve({ data: 'abc' });
}
function toItemDetails(tagData, itemData) {
return { itemDetails: { tagData, itemData } };
}
function fetchTagsForItem(id = null) {
let itemFromAxios;
return {
type: 'FETCH_ITEM_INFO',
payload: getItem(id)
.then(item => {
itemFromAxios = item;
return getTags(item.tagIds);
})
.then(tags => toItemDetails(tags.data, itemFromAxios.data))
};
}
const action = fetchTagsForItem(1);
action.payload.then(result => {
console.log(`result: ${JSON.stringify(result)}`);
});
Output:
result: {"itemDetails":{"tagData":"abc","itemData":"data inside item"}}
In order to access item in the second step, you'll need to store it in a variable that is declared in the function scope of fetchTagsForItem, because the two .thens are essentially siblings: both can access the enclosing scope, but the second call to .then won't have access to vars declared in the first one.
Separation of concerns
The code that creates the action you send to Redux is also making multiple Axios calls and massaging the returned data. This makes it more complicated to read and understand, and will make it harder to do things like handle errors in your Axios calls. I suggest splitting things up. One option:
Put any code that calls Axios in its own function
Set payload to the return value of that function.
Move that function, and all other funcs that call Axios, into a separate file (or set of files). That file becomes your API client.
This would look something like:
// apiclient.js
const BASE_URL = 'https://yourapiserver.com/';
const makeUrl = (relativeUrl) => BASE_URL + relativeUrl;
function getItemById(id) {
return axios.get(makeUrl(GET_ITEM_URL) + id);
}
function fetchTagsForItemWithId(id) {
...
}
// Other client calls and helper funcs here
export default {
fetchTagsForItemWithId
};
Your actions file:
// items-actions.js
import ApiClient from './api-client';
function fetchItemTags(id) {
const itemInfoPromise = ApiClient.fetchTagsForItemWithId(id);
return {
type: 'FETCH_ITEM_INFO',
payload: itemInfoPromise
};
}