We Keep Coding

How can I correctly use the React context API in a class based component? [duplicate]

In this example, I have this react class:
class MyDiv extends React.component
constructor(){
this.state={sampleState:'hello world'}
}
render(){
return <div>{this.state.sampleState}
}
}
The question is if I can add React hooks to this. I understand that React-Hooks is alternative to React Class style. But if I wish to slowly migrate into React hooks, can I add useful hooks into Classes?

High order components are how we have been doing this type of thing until hooks came along. You can write a simple high order component wrapper for your hook.
function withMyHook(Component) {
return function WrappedComponent(props) {
const myHookValue = useMyHook();
return <Component {...props} myHookValue={myHookValue} />;
}
}
While this isn't truly using a hook directly from a class component, this will at least allow you to use the logic of your hook from a class component, without refactoring.
class MyComponent extends React.Component {
render(){
const myHookValue = this.props.myHookValue;
return <div>{myHookValue}</div>;
}
}
export default withMyHook(MyComponent);

Class components don't support hooks -
According to the Hooks-FAQ:
You can’t use Hooks inside of a class component, but you can definitely mix classes and function components with Hooks in a single tree. Whether a component is a class or a function that uses Hooks is an implementation detail of that component. In the longer term, we expect Hooks to be the primary way people write React components.

As other answers already explain, hooks API was designed to provide function components with functionality that currently is available only in class components. Hooks aren't supposed to used in class components.
Class components can be written to make easier a migration to function components.
With a single state:
class MyDiv extends Component {
state = {sampleState: 'hello world'};
render(){
const { state } = this;
const setState = state => this.setState(state);
return <div onClick={() => setState({sampleState: 1})}>{state.sampleState}</div>;
}
}
is converted to
const MyDiv = () => {
const [state, setState] = useState({sampleState: 'hello world'});
return <div onClick={() => setState({sampleState: 1})}>{state.sampleState}</div>;
}
Notice that useState state setter doesn't merge state properties automatically, this should be covered with setState(prevState => ({ ...prevState, foo: 1 }));
With multiple states:
class MyDiv extends Component {
state = {sampleState: 'hello world'};
render(){
const { sampleState } = this.state;
const setSampleState = sampleState => this.setState({ sampleState });
return <div onClick={() => setSampleState(1)}>{sampleState}</div>;
}
}
is converted to
const MyDiv = () => {
const [sampleState, setSampleState] = useState('hello world');
return <div onClick={() => setSampleState(1)}>{sampleState}</div>;
}

Complementing Joel Cox's good answer
Render Props also enable the usage of Hooks inside class components, if more flexibility is needed:
class MyDiv extends React.Component {
render() {
return (
<HookWrapper
// pass state/props from inside of MyDiv to Hook
someProp={42}
// process Hook return value
render={hookValue => <div>Hello World! {hookValue}</div>}
/>
);
}
}
function HookWrapper({ someProp, render }) {
const hookValue = useCustomHook(someProp);
return render(hookValue);
}
For side effect Hooks without return value:
function HookWrapper({ someProp }) {
useCustomHook(someProp);
return null;
}
// ... usage
<HookWrapper someProp={42} />
Source: React Training

you can achieve this by generic High order components
HOC
import React from 'react';
const withHook = (Component, useHook, hookName = 'hookvalue') => {
return function WrappedComponent(props) {
const hookValue = useHook();
return <Component {...props} {...{[hookName]: hookValue}} />;
};
};
export default withHook;
Usage
class MyComponent extends React.Component {
render(){
const myUseHookValue = this.props.myUseHookValue;
return <div>{myUseHookValue}</div>;
}
}
export default withHook(MyComponent, useHook, 'myUseHookValue');

Hooks are not meant to be used for classes but rather functions. If you wish to use hooks, you can start by writing new code as functional components with hooks
According to React FAQs
You can’t use Hooks inside of a class component, but you can
definitely mix classes and function components with Hooks in a single
tree. Whether a component is a class or a function that uses Hooks is
an implementation detail of that component. In the longer term, we
expect Hooks to be the primary way people write React components.
const MyDiv = () => {
const [sampleState, setState] = useState('hello world');
render(){
return <div>{sampleState}</div>
}
}

You can use the react-universal-hooks library. It lets you use the "useXXX" functions within the render function of class-components.
It's worked great for me so far. The only issue is that since it doesn't use the official hooks, the values don't show react-devtools.
To get around this, I created an equivalent by wrapping the hooks, and having them store their data (using object-mutation to prevent re-renders) on component.state.hookValues. (you can access the component by auto-wrapping the component render functions, to run set currentCompBeingRendered = this)
For more info on this issue (and details on the workaround), see here: https://github.com/salvoravida/react-universal-hooks/issues/7

Stateful components or containers or class-based components ever support the functions of React Hooks, so we don't need to React Hooks in Stateful components just in stateless components.
Some additional informations
What are React Hooks?
So what are hooks? Well hooks are a new way or offer us a new way of writing our components.
Thus far, of course we have functional and class-based components, right? Functional components receive props and you return some JSX code that should be rendered to the screen.
They are great for presentation, so for rendering the UI part, not so much about the business logic and they are typically focused on one or a few purposes per component.
Class-based components on the other hand also will receive props but they also have this internal state. Therefore class-based components are the components which actually hold the majority of our business logic, so with business logic, I mean things like we make an HTTP request and we need to handle the response and to change the internal state of the app or maybe even without HTTP. A user fills out the form and we want to show this somewhere on the screen, we need state for this, we need class-based components for this and therefore we also typically use class based components to orchestrate our other components and pass our state down as props to functional components for example.
Now one problem we have with this separation, with all the benefits it adds but one problem we have is that converting from one component form to the other is annoying. It's not really difficult but it is annoying.
If you ever found yourself in a situation where you needed to convert a functional component into a class-based one, it's a lot of typing and a lot of typing of always the same things, so it's annoying.
A bigger problem in quotation marks is that lifecycle hooks can be hard to use right.
Obviously, it's not hard to add componentDidMount and execute some code in there but knowing which lifecycle hook to use, when and how to use it correctly, that can be challenging especially in more complex applications and anyways, wouldn't it be nice if we had one way of creating components and that super component could then handle both state and side effects like HTTP requests and also render the user interface?
Well, this is exactly what hooks are all about. Hooks give us a new way of creating functional components and that is important.

React Hooks let you use react features and lifecycle without writing a class.
It's like the equivalent version of the class component with much smaller and readable form factor. You should migrate to React hooks because it's fun to write it.
But you can't write react hooks inside a class component, as it's introduced for functional component.
This can be easily converted to :
class MyDiv extends React.component
constructor(){
this.state={sampleState:'hello world'}
}
render(){
return <div>{this.state.sampleState}
}
}
const MyDiv = () => {
const [sampleState, setSampleState] = useState('hello world');
return <div>{sampleState}</div>
}

It won't be possible with your existing class components. You'll have to convert your class component into a functional component and then do something on the lines of -
function MyDiv() {
const [sampleState, setSampleState] = useState('hello world');
return (
<div>{sampleState}</div>
)
}

For me React.createRef() was helpful.
ex.:
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.myRef = React.createRef();
}
...
<FunctionComponent ref={this.myRef} />
Origin post here.

I've made a library for this. React Hookable Component.
Usage is very simple. Replace extends Component or extends PureComponent with extends HookableComponent or extends HookablePureComponent. You can then use hooks in the render() method.
import { HookableComponent } from 'react-hookable-component';
// 👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇
class ComponentThatUsesHook extends HookableComponent<Props, State> {
render() {
// 👇👇👇👇👇👇
const value = useSomeHook();
return <span>The value is {value}</span>;
}
}

if you didn't need to change your class component then create another functional component and do hook stuff and import it to class component

Doesn't work anymore in modern React Versions. Took me forever, but finally resulted going back to go ol' callbacks. Only thing that worked for me, all other's threw the know React Hook Call (outside functional component) error.
Non-React or React Context:
class WhateverClass {
private xyzHook: (XyzHookContextI) | undefined
public setHookAccessor (xyzHook: XyzHookContextI): void {
this.xyzHook = xyzHook
}
executeHook (): void {
const hookResult = this.xyzHook?.specificHookFunction()
...
}
}
export const Whatever = new WhateverClass() // singleton
Your hook (or your wrapper for an external Hook)
export interface XyzHookContextI {
specificHookFunction: () => Promise<string>
}
const XyzHookContext = createContext<XyzHookContextI>(undefined as any)
export function useXyzHook (): XyzHookContextI {
return useContext(XyzHookContextI)
}
export function XyzHook (props: PropsWithChildren<{}>): JSX.Element | null {
async function specificHookFunction (): Promise<void> {
...
}
const context: XyzHookContextI = {
specificHookFunction
}
// and here comes the magic in wiring that hook up with the non function component context via callback
Whatever.setHookAccessor(context)
return (
< XyzHookContext.Provider value={context}>
{props.children}
</XyzHookContext.Provider>
)
}
Voila, now you can use ANY react code (via hook) from any other context (class components, vanilla-js, …)!
(…hope I didn't make to many name change mistakes :P)

Yes, but not directly.
Try react-iifc, more details in its readme.
https://github.com/EnixCoda/react-iifc

Try with-component-hooks:
https://github.com/bplok20010/with-component-hooks
import withComponentHooks from 'with-component-hooks';
class MyComponent extends React.Component {
render(){
const props = this.props;
const [counter, set] = React.useState(0);
//TODO...
}
}
export default withComponentHooks(MyComponent)
2.Try react-iifc： https://github.com/EnixCoda/react-iifc

Separating the logic and the render() function from a component

I would like to be able to have a component whose rendering function is in another file in order to have a separation between the logic of my component and the rendering.
Naively, I tried to do just one file containing my component and which rendered a functional component of the same name to which I passed the necessary props so that everything was displayed correctly.
Something like that :
// MyComponent.render.jsx
export default MyComponentRender = (props) => {
return {
<View>
// render all components of my view
</View>
}
}
// MyComponent.js
class MyComponent extends Component {
// some logic
render() {
return (
<MyComponentRender
aLotOfProps=....
/>
)
}
}
But I soon found myself having to send, sometimes, a fairly large amount of props and +, I have for example textInputs that need to be focus() or blur() in reaction to some logic in my view but as a result, I couldn't control that just by sending props. It quickly became a mess!
I was wondering if there was a simple way to separate the logic of a component and its rendering function? Maybe there is a way to pass the context of my component to my rendering function/component so that it has direct access to all states and can also store references, etc.?
Thanks you,
Viktor

I can't understand why components with 'connect()' are stateful in react

My question is just same as the title.
Let's say I wrote the following code.
class TODOList extends Component {
render() {
const {todos, onClick} = this.props;
return (
<ul>
{todos.map(todo =>
<Todo
key={todo.id}
onClick={onClick}
{...todo}
/>
)}
</ul>
);
}
}
const mapStateToProps = (state) => {
return {
todos: state.todos
}
}
const mapDispatchToProps = (dispatch) => {
return {
onClick(data){
dispatch(complete(data))
}
}
}
export default connect(mapStateToProps,mapDispatchToProps)(TODOList);
Now, after the last line, this code will export the TODOList component with the state as props. It's not that it contains state, but just received state and will have them as 'props', just like the method name 'mapStateToProps' explains.
In the medium post(https://medium.com/#dan_abramov/smart-and-dumb-components-7ca2f9a7c7d0) written by Dan Abramov, container component handles data as state, and presentational property do as props. Isn't it a presentational component that deals with data as props? I'm stuck with the idea that the right container should be one like below.
class CommentList extends React.Component {
this.state = { comments: [] };
componentDidMount() {
fetchSomeComments(comments =>
this.setState({ comments: comments }));
}
render() {
return (
<ul>
{this.state.comments.map(c => (
<li>{c.body}—{c.author}</li>
))}
</ul>
);
}
}
I'm not sure why react-redux named the API 'mapStateToProps', when I tried to make 'stateful'(not handling data by property) container component

First of all these guidelines are not part of the bible
you should write code that is easy to reason about for YOU and your TEAM.
I think you are missing something, A redux Container is different than a react Container.
I mean, connect will create the container for you, it doesn't mean the wraped component is a Container.
Basically you can export both versions from the same file, the Container (connected version) and the presentation version (the none connected one).
Another thing that usually throw people off, is the name of the function and argument of mapStateToProps.
I prefer the name mapStoreToProps as in
map the redux store to the component's props.
the name state can be confusing when we are in the context of react.
Edit
As a followup to your comment:
I totally didn't know these two are actually different. Could you please tell me about more details
They are different in the way that connect is creating a "Container" for you.
connect is a High Order Component that creates the Container Component for us with all the subscription logic + functions to pass portions of the store and action-creators to its children as props (mapStateToProps & mapDispatchToProps).
A "normal" Container is usually refers to a component that you write by hand, its often doesn't deal with how things should look but instead deal with certain logic of the app.
As for the other comments like
The connect HoC of react-redux just injects the properties you can request into your component. It returns a new component that is wrapped around your component so that it can update your component whenever the state you're interested in the redux store is modified
As i mentioned above, this is partially true. It's not just injecting the properties into our component, its subscribing to the store, grabbing it from the Provider (via context) and its doing all these with optimizations in mind, so we won't have to do it by ourselves.
I'm not sure how mapStateToProps can confuse someone. We are talking about a state management library
I've seen some devs that misunderstood this because react has a state and redux has a store (at least that's how it was called in most of the tutorials and documentations).
this can be confusing to some people that are new to either react or redux.
Edit 2
It was a bit confusing due to the sentence 'it doesn't mean the wraped component is a Container.' Why is the wrapped component not a container? Isn't a component created by connect also a container?
I mean that the wrapped component that you wrote doesn't have to be a Container.
You can connect a "Presentation" component:
const Link = ({ active, children, onClick }) => {
if (active) {
return <span>{children}</span>
}
return (
<a
href=""
onClick={e => {
e.preventDefault()
onClick()
}}
>
{children}
</a>
)
}
// ...
export default connect(mapState, mapDispatch)(Link)

mapStateToProps will be called when store data changes. It will pass the returned object as new props for the component. This will not affect the component's state. If you'd like to set a new state after the component got its new props you need to use another lifecycle method: static getDerivedStateFromProps (in earlier versions of react componentWillRecieveProps). The object returned by static getDerivedStateFromProps will be your new state.
https://reactjs.org/docs/state-and-lifecycle.html#adding-lifecycle-methods-to-a-class
connect() will connect your component to the redux store. Withouth the connect function (of course) your mapStateToProps will not work.
I'm not sure why react-redux named the API 'mapStateToProps'
We are talking about the store's state :)

The high level purpose is to seamlessly integrate Redux's state management into the React application. Redux revolves around the store where all the state exists. There is no way to directly modify the store except through reducers whom receive actions from action creators and for that to happen we need for an action to be dispatched from the action creator.
The connect() function directly connects our components to the Redux store by taking the state in the Redux store and mapping it into a prop.
This is power of Redux and its why we use it.
Lets say you are building a component called LaundryList and you want it to render a laundry list. After you have wired up the Provider in your "parent" component, I put it in quotes because technically Provider is a component so it becomes the parent.
You can then import the connect() function from react-redux, pass it mapStateToProps in order to get that laundry list from the Redux store into your LaundryList component.
Now that you have your list of linens inside of the LaundryList component you can start to focus on building a list of elements out of them like so:
class LaundryList extends Component {
render() {
console.log(this.props.linens);
return <div>LaundryList</div>;
}
}
That contains the list of linens object and for every list of linens inside of there we are going to return some jsx that is going to represent that linen on my list.
Back inside my laundry list component I will add a helper method inside the laundry list component called render list like so:
class LaundryList extends Component {
renderList() {
}
render() {
return <div>LaundryList</div>;
}
}
So this purpose of this helper method is to take the list of linens, map over them and return a big blob of jsx like so:
class LaundryList extends Component {
renderList() {
return this.props.linens.map((linen) => {
return (
);
});
}
render() {
return <div>LaundryList</div>;
}
}

State management in React component when the business logic is outside of the component

there! The App component is a container for three different components:
Map renders a map with visual marks on it representing addresses the user has provide.
List component contains all added addresses as list items.
Input allows a user to add a new address (in my terms that is called LocationPoint).
Right now, the App keeps locations array in state with all those addresses (LocationPoints) and passes that array into all child components.
Manipulations with LocationPoints (add/move/update/deleteLocationPoint) are taken out to separate function as they are quite generic and may be reused somewhere else later.
But because those functions do not know about state existence I have to create some kind of "provider" functions that calls those actions (addLocationPoint, deleteLocationPoint, etc). E.g. addLocationPoint func has to be called inside App.addLocationPoint.
The following example should explain what I was talking about better. Note: snippet doesn't work as it's not a real implementation.
// Adds a new location point
const addLocactionPoint = (locations: array, address: string) => {
// ...
return updatedLocations;
}
class App extends React.Component {
constructor() {
this.state = {
locations: [],
}
// bind addLocPoint, etc.
}
addLocPoint(address) {
this.setState(state => {
addLocactionPoint(state.locations, address);
});
}
// ...
render() {
return (
<Input onSubmit={ this.addLocPoint } />
<List
onDrag={ this.moveLocPoint }
onDelete={ this.deleteLocPoint }
/>
<Map data={ this.state.locations } />
);
}
}
Can my approach be considered as a good practice? Or there are other ways to reduce amount of logic in App component and to avoid creating those "providers" without using state management libs (MobX, Redux, etc). Maybe the case I consider is a right time to introduce a Redux or MobX?
I'll be really grateful for advice or recommendations or links to explore on this question.

It's already good enough, this is how global state is usually maintained in vanilla React with no state management libraries. Context API may additionally be used to pass the state to nested components.
The thing that can be changed is that functions that update the state can actually be extracted and used as setState higher-order updater functions:
const addLocationPoint = (address) => ({ location }) => {
// ...
return updatedLocations;
}
class App extends React.Component {
...
addLocPoint(address) {
this.setState(addLocationPoint(address));
}
...
A similar idea is used in Redux action creators.
In order for state updaters to provide real improvements, they have to be moved to another module. In this case they can be tested separately from a component that uses them and mocked with jest.mock in a component that uses them.

Can/Should the main component be the only component with a state in react JS?

I have a react app that ties into localStorage of the browser. On the startup of the app, the localStorage is populated with all the data that is needed to run the app. This data is pulled with AJAX from XML files and constructed to form a localStorageObject that the web app can use as its "database" of information to pull content from...
At the moment, The main component's state is set to the localstorage. So essentially I have the following:
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
courseData : JSON.parse(localStorage.getItem("storageID"));,
}
}
The state contains an object that is the entirety of the localStorage. Now I have many children components, who also have children components themselves. Some are components that just need to render once, while others are going to need to rerender with interaction from the user.
After reading, it seems there are many ways to implement a solution. I could have all the components have state, but that's not needed. I could just have the main component have state, and no other component have state. And whenever the state of the main component changes, the props will be based down and reupdated.
Is there a specific method that is best?

This method works, but.
First of all, localStorage calls should be on a componentDidMount function. Otherwise, it wouldn't work on a server-side-rendering case.
Secondly, I'd implement all the initial data fetching on a parent function and then pass down data to the root of react tree:
const localStorageData = localStorage.getItem('some_data')
ReactDom.render(
document.getElementById('my-element'),
<MyComponent
localStorageData={localStorageData}
/>
)

if have many children components it will be difficult to manage state because of deep nesting.
I would recommend using Higher Order Component for your local storage implementation And Pass it down to children. Here How I would do it:
import React from 'react';
var HigherOrderComponent = (Component) =>
class extends React.Component {
state={locStorage:{}}
componentDidMount(){
this.setState({locStorage:window.localStorage.getItem("data")})
}
render() {
return (
<Component
locStorage={this.state.locStorage}
/>
)
}
};
export default HigherOrderComponent;
import HigherOrderComponent from './HigherOrderComponent'
const ChildComponent = ({locStorage}) => {
console.log(locStorage)
return (
<div>
</div>
);
};
export default HigherOrderComponent(ChildComponent);