I need help designing a simple app which allows user to rate videos using a form. My state is composed by 2 reducers, one that holds data about all ratable videos (in a normalized fashion) and another one that holds the form state:
{
videos: {
'video1Id': { id: 'video1Id', title: 'Cat video', duration: 120, ... },
'video2Id': { ... },
...
},
rateForm: {
'videoId': 'video1Id'
'userComment: 'A nice video about cat'
'formSubmitted': false
...
}
}
Note that, inside rateForm, I reference the video id instead of the video object. Problem is, how can I retreive the whole video object from my rateForm reducer ?
I feel like I'm following the best practice of Redux design but I'm stuck at this really simple use case. Any help appreciated.
Thanks
One thing to remember, reducer should be AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE. Only doing atomic operations on reducer level. From what I can tell you trying to retrieve the whole video object in your reducer just doesn't sound right.
Depending on your needs, usually, you don't need to fetch the whole video object if you just want to comment on it or rate it. But if you are 100% sure you have to, A good place to do this is in your action. Using Redux-Thunk, you will have access to the whole state object before you return your thunk. Example
function doSomethingToVideo (videoId, something) {
return (dispatch, getState) => {
const video = getState().videos[videoId]
// Do what ever
return somethingElse
}
}
Reference: Redux author's answer on a similar matter.
Accessing Redux state in an action creator?
Related
I have some normalised data (items) within my redux store:
{
items: {
index: ['a','b'],
dict: {
a: {
title: "red",
},
b: {
title: "car",
}
}
},
...
}
So, if I want to update anything within an item object, the reducer looks like this:
...
const itemsReducer = (state = initialState.items, action) => {
switch (action.type) {
case itemsActions.types.UPDATE_ITEM: {
return {
...state,
[action.payload.itemId]: {
title: action.payload.title,
}
}
}
default: return state;
}
};
But this technique creates a new object for items, which can cause unnecessary components to re-render, when really it should only cause components that subscribe to state changes of the individual object to re-render.
Is there any way to get around this?
That is how immutable updates are required to work - you must create copies of every level of nesting that needs to be updated.
In general, components should extract the smallest amount of data that they need from the store, to help minimize the chance of unnecessary re-renders. For example, most of the time a component probably shouldn't be reading the entire state.items slice.
FWIW, it looks like you're hand-writing your reducer logic. You should be using our official Redux Toolkit package to write your Redux logic in general. RTK also specifically has a createEntityAdapter API that will do most typical normalized state updates for you, so you don't have to write reducer logic by hand.
I'll also note that the recently released Reselect 4.1 version has new options you can use for customizing memoized selectors as well.
I am trying to implement a search filter in my application which uses react/redux using redux-search. The first gotcha I get is when I try to add the store enhancer as in the example.
// Compose :reduxSearch with other store enhancers
const enhancer = compose(
applyMiddleware(...yourMiddleware),
reduxSearch({
// Configure redux-search by telling it which resources to index for searching
resourceIndexes: {
// In this example Books will be searchable by :title and :author
books: ['author', 'title']
},
// This selector is responsible for returning each collection of searchable resources
resourceSelector: (resourceName, state) => {
// In our example, all resources are stored in the state under a :resources Map
// For example "books" are stored under state.resources.books
return state.resources.get(resourceName)
}
})
)
I understand evarything up to the resourceSelector, when I tried to get a deep dive into the example to see how it works but I can barely see how they are generated and the last line returns an error, Cannot read property 'get' of undefined
My state object looks like this
state: {
//books is an array of objects...each object represents a book
books:[
//a book has these properties
{name, id, author, datePublished}
]
}
Any help from anyone who understands redux-search is helpful
If this line:
return state.resources.get(resourceName)
Is causing this error:
Cannot read property 'get' of undefined
That indicates that state.resources is not defined. And sure enough, your state doesn't define a resources attribute.
The examples were written with the idea in mind of using redux-search to index many types of resources, eg:
state: {
resources: {
books: [...],
authors: [...],
// etc
}
}
The solution to the issue you've reported would be to either:
A: Add an intermediary resources object (if you think you might want to index other things in the future and you like that organization).
B: Replace state.resources.get(resourceName) with state[resourceName] or similar.
Let's say I have an initial state in my redux application that looks like this:
{
themeParks : []
}
And theme park objects are stored in a MongoDB or wherever like this:
{
ParkName : "Disney World",
NumberOfRides : 25
}
My app fetches (via ajax) and displays the theme parks on load, and lets me do CRUD operations to add / remove / edit theme parks.
My question is, what is the best point in the application to merge in new properties that I will need, that are related to UI changes and need to be included in the state? For example, at some point I need to add an "editing" boolean property to each theme park, so they look like this:
{
ParkName : "Disney World",
NumberOfRides : 25,
editing : false
}
This "editing" flag needs to be a property of each theme park object, to provide the ability to have multiple theme parks in an editable state while using the application, is that correct? Obviously I don't want or need to store this flag in my database schema as it only relates to UI operations.
My first guess would be to include such logic within my .then function after successful return of the data, like this, but I'm not sure:
let ajax = new AjaxHanlder();
let promise = ajax.DoGet('/path/to/api-endpoint');
promise.then((themeParks) => {
themeParks.map((themePark, i) => {
themePark.editing = false;
});
dispatch({type : LOAD_THEME_PARKS, payload : themeParks});
});
Also, is there a convention for providing a definition of the theme park object before it is loaded, since the initial state is an empty array and has no knowledge of it?
Thanks in advance for any insight on this, as I attempt to advance my knowledge of redux design patterns :-)
I recommend adding the editing property to your LOAD_THEME_PARKS reducer. For example, part of your LOAD_THEME_PARKS reducer could look like:
case LOAD_THEME_PARKS:
return {
...state,
themeParks: action.payload.map(park => park.editing = false)
};
I'm building an app where actions are performed as the user scrolls down. It would be nice if I could undo those actions as the user scrolls up again, basically turning scrolling into a way to browse through the time line of actions.
Is there a built-in way in Redux to do this? Or would I have to write middleware for this?
Is there a built-in way in Redux to do this? Or would I have to write middleware for this?
Middleware sounds like the wrong idea in this case because this is purely state management concern. Instead you can write a function that takes a reducer and returns a reducer, “enhancing” it with action history tracking along the way.
I outlined this approach in this answer, and it's similar to how redux-undo works, except that instead of storing the state, you can store actions. (Depends on the tradeoffs you want to make, and whether it's important to be able to “cancel” actions in a different order than they happened.)
I believe the idea is not so much "undo" as much as save a reference to the entire state tree each time an action passes through redux.
You would have a history stack made up of the application state at various times.
let history = [state1, state2, state3]
// some action happens
let history = [state1, state2, state3, state4]
// some action happens
let history = [state1, state2, state3, state4, state5]
// undo an action
let history = [state1, state2, state3, state4]
state = state4
To "undo" an action, you just replace the application state with one of the saved states.
This can be made efficient with data structures that support structural sharing, but in development we don't really need to consider resource constraints too much anyway.
I also wanted to create a simple undo functionality, but had already shipped an app with redux-storage that serializes and loads the state for every user. So to keep it backwards-compatible, I couldn't use any solution that wraps my state keys, like redux-undo does with past: [] and present:.
Looking for an alternative, Dan's tutorial inspired me to override combineReducers. Now I have one part of the state: history that saves up to 10 copies of the rest of the state and pops them on the UNDO action. Here's the code, this might work for your case too:
function shouldSaveUndo(action){
const blacklist = ['##INIT', 'REDUX_STORAGE_SAVE', 'REDUX_STORAGE_LOAD', 'UNDO'];
return !blacklist.includes(action.type);
}
function combineReducers(reducers){
return (state = {}, action) => {
if (action.type == "UNDO" && state.history.length > 0){
// Load previous state and pop the history
return {
...Object.keys(reducers).reduce((stateKeys, key) => {
stateKeys[key] = state.history[0][key];
return stateKeys;
}, {}),
history: state.history.slice(1)
}
} else {
// Save a new undo unless the action is blacklisted
const newHistory = shouldSaveUndo(action) ?
[{
...Object.keys(reducers).reduce((stateKeys, key) => {
stateKeys[key] = state[key];
return stateKeys;
}, {})
}] : undefined;
return {
// Calculate the next state
...Object.keys(reducers).reduce((stateKeys, key) => {
stateKeys[key] = reducers[key](state[key], action);
return stateKeys;
}, {}),
history: [
...(newHistory || []),
...(state.history || [])
].slice(0, 10)
};
}
};
}
export default combineReducers({
reducerOne,
reducerTwo,
reducerThree
});
For me, this works like a charm, it just doesn't look very pretty. I'd be happy for any feedback if this is a good / bad idea and why ;-)
There's no built-in way to do this.
but you can get inspired by how redux-dev-tools works (https://github.com/gaearon/redux-devtools). It basically have "time travel" functionality and it work by keep a track of all actions and reevaluating them each time. So you can navigate easily thorough all your changes.
I am currently developping an app with the amazing Meteor platform. I would like to do something with my collections but I couldn't really find how to do it from the examples I have seen so far.
Basically I would like to display a list of items which contains their own countdown. Each items core data come from a collection. Each countdown starting times must be computed server side and not saved anywhere. Each countdown are computed client side and not saved anywhere.
I have a collection named "items" coming from my MongoDb db. At the beginning document in my collections could look like:
{ name: "My countdown"}
1) I would like to "extend" the documents server side in adding a computed property "startTime". A documents could look like then:
{ name: "My countdown", startTime: 40 }
I guess I need to use the publish method, but I don't really get how to extend existing documents that way.
2) I would like to "extend" the documents client side in adding a local property "currentTime", that i will update with a setInterval. A document could look like then:
{ name: "My countdown", startTime: 40, currentTime: 5 }
Maybe using a transform there but once again I don't really get how to extend existing documents.
3) I would likethoses 2 new properties reactives and so trigger some updates in the UI if they change.
So if i could get any starting points and good pratices it will be really appreciated :)
Many thanks for your help!!
You can update a document of a Collection: Best practice is to do this on the server.
client.js
Meteor.call('setStartTime',
[your_document_id],
[new_start_time],
function(err, val) {
if (err) {
console.error(err);
} else {
// Successful.
}
});
server.js
Meteor.methods({
'setStartTime': function(itemId, newStartTime) {
Items.update(itemId, {
$set: { startTime: newStartTime }
});
}
});
This will set or update the startTime of your item. (Be cautious, as anyone with access to your JavaScript will be able to see your setStartTime call on the client. This is functional, but not secure.)