I am reading the document of Reactjs about not mutating data.
I do not understand the difference between 2 pieces of code in document's example:
handleClick() {
// This section is bad style and causes a bug
const words = this.state.words;
words.push('marklar');
this.setState({words: words});
}
and:
handleClick() {
this.setState(prevState => ({
words: prevState.words.concat(['marklar'])
}));
}
Why the second code does not mutate the data?
Simply put, concatreturns a new copy of the array, hence it doesn't mutate the previous array.
In the first example you have an array and are adding a new item, by using push to this array.
In the second example you are creating a copy of the array, by using concat and adding the item, which means you do not mutate the original array. concat returns a new array.
In the second example you are not mutating the original array. Not mutating state is an important principle in React and Redux.
There is a good answer here explaining the reasons for avoiding mutation.
Related
I have the following code :-
const [dice, setDice] = React.useState(allNewDice()) // Array of objects with the following properties: `value` (random digit between 1 and 6), `id` (unique id), `isHeld` (boolean)
function holdDice(id) {
const heldDie = dice.findIndex(die => die.id === id)
setDice(prevDice => {
prevDice[heldDie].isHeld = !prevDice[heldDie].isHeld
return prevDice
})
}
The function holdDice is working as expected. It updates prevDice's first element's isHeld property to the opposite of what was previously, as evident from logging it to the console. But the only problem is, the state is not getting updated.
So I tried making a copy of prevDice and then returning the copy (using the spread (...) operator) :-
const [dice, setDice] = React.useState(allNewDice()) // Array of objects with the following properties: `value` (random digit between 1 and 6), `id` (unique id), `isHeld` (boolean)
function holdDice(id) {
const heldDie = dice.findIndex(die => die.id === id)
setDice(prevDice => {
prevDice[heldDie].isHeld = !prevDice[heldDie].isHeld
return [...prevDice]
})
}
And this works perfectly.
Can anyone please explain why this behaviour? Why can't I return the previous state passed in to be set as the new state, even when I am not returning the previous state, exactly as it was?
I understand that it's expensive to re-render the component and that maybe React does not update the state when the previous and the new states are equal. But here, the previous and the new states are not equal.
My first guess was that it might have been related to React not deep checking whether the objets of the array prevDice have been changed or not, or something like that. So I created an array of Numbers and tried changing it's first element to some other number, but unless i returned a copy of the array, the state still did not change.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
The first time you call setDice() after the initial mount of your component or rerender, prevDice refers to the same array in memory that your dice state refers to (so prevDice === dice). It is not a unqiue copy of the array that you're able to modify. You can't/shouldn't modify it because the object that prevDice refers to is the same object that dice refers to, so you're actually modifying the dice state directly when you change prevState. Because of this, when the modified prevDice is used as the value for setDice(), React checks to see if the new state (which is prevState) is different from the current state (dice) to see if it needs to rerender. React does this equality check by using === (or more specifically Object.is()) to check if the two arrays/objects are the same, and if they are, it doesn't rerender. When React uses === between prevState and dice, JS checks to see if both variables are referring to the same arrays/objects. In our case they are, so React doesn't rerender. That's why it's very important to treat your state as immutable, which you can think of as meaning that you should treat your state as readonly, and instead, if you want to change it, you can make a "copy" of it and change the copy. Doing so will correctly tell React to use that new modified copy as the new state when passed into setDice().
Do note that while your second example does work, you are still modifying your state directly, and this can still cause issues. Your second example works because the array you are returning is a new array [], but the contents of that array (ie: the object references) still refers to the same objects in memory that your original dice state array referred to. To correctly perform your update in an immutable way, you can use something like .map(), which by nature returns a new array (so we'll rerender). When you map, you can return a new inner object when you find the one you want to update (rather than updating it directly). This way, your array is a new array, and any updated objects are also new:
function holdDice(id) {
setDice(prevDice => prevDice.map( // `.map()` returns a new array, so different to the `dice`/`prevDice` state
die => die.id === id
? {...die, isHeld: !die.isHeld} // new object, with overwritten property `isHeld`
: die
));
}
State doesn't update because you update it yourself in the setDice function.
dice and prevDice refer to the same object so it won't trigger a re-render.
const [dice, setDice] = React.useState(allNewDice())
function holdDice(id) {
const heldDie = dice.findIndex(die => die.id === id)
setDice(prevDice => {
// Create a copy of the dice
// Use whatever method you wish.Spread. JSON parse and stringify.
const currentDice = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(prevDice))
currentDice[heldDie].isHeld = !prevDice[heldDie].isHeld
return currentDice
})
}
I am working on an Angular 9, RxJS 6 app and have a question regarding the different outcomes of piping subject values and doing unit conversion in that pipe.
Please have a look at this stackblitz. There, inside the backend.service.ts file, an observable is created that does some "unit conversion" and returns everything that is emmitted to the _commodities Subject. If you look at the convertCommodityUnits function, please notice that I commented out the working example and instead have the way I solved it initially.
My question: When you use the unsubscribe buttons on the screen and subscribe again, when using the "conversion solution" that just overrides the object without making a copy, the values in the HTML are converted multiple times, so the pipe does not use the original data that the subject provides. If you use the other code, so creating a clone of the commodity object inside convertCommodityUnits, it works like expected.
Now, I don't understand why the two ways of converting the data behave so differently. I get that one manipulates the data directly, because js does Call by sharing and one returns a new object. But the object that is passed to the convertCommodityUnits function is created by the array.prototype.map function, so it should not overwrite anything, right? I expect that RxJS uses the original, last data that was emitted to the subject to pass into the pipe/map operators, but that does not seem to be the case in the example, right?
How/Why are the values converted multiple times here?
This is more or less a follow-up question on this: Angular/RxJS update piped subject manually (even if no data changed), "unit conversion in rxjs pipe", so it's the same setup.
When you're using map you got a new reference for the array. But you don't get new objects in the newly generated array (shallow copy of the array), so you're mutating the data inside the element.
In the destructuring solution, because you have only primitive types in each object in the array, you kind of generate completely brand new elements to your array each time the conversion method is called (this is important: not only a new array but also new elements in the array => you have performed a deep copy of the array). So you don't accumulate successively the values in each subscription.
It doesn't mean that the 1-level destructuring solution like you used in the provided stackblitz demo will work in all cases. I've seen this mistake being made a lot out there, particularly in redux pattern frameworks that need you to not mutate the stored data, like ngrx, ngxs etc. If you had complex objects in your array, the 1-level destructuring would've kept untouched all the embedded objects in each element of the array. I think it's easier to describe this behavior with examples:
const obj1 = {a: 1};
const array = [{b: 2, obj: obj1}];
// after every newArray assignment in the below code,
// console.log(newArray === array) prints false to the console
let newArray = [...array];
console.log(array[0] === newArray[0]); // true
newArray = array.map(item => item);
console.log(array[0] === newArray[0]); // true
newArray = array.map(item => ({...item}));
console.log(array[0] === newArray[0]); // false
console.log(array[0].obj === newArray[0].obj); // true
newArray = array.map(item => ({
...item,
obj: {...item.obj}
}));
console.log(array[0] === newArray[0]); // false
console.log(array[0].obj === newArray[0].obj); // false
Currently I've a react function that removes from a Array called rents the current rent perfect. The issue is that I need to update the rent row value called status and set property from 1 to 4 the code below works. I don't seem to get how to get the Index of rent to be able to update it.
removeItem (itemIndex) {
this.state.rents.splice(itemIndex, 1) // removes the element
this.setState({rents: this.state.rents}) // sets again the array without the value to the rent prop
console.log(itemIndex) // itemIndex
}
currently I'm adding this to the code to debug but get this error
console.log(this.state.rents[itemIndex].unique_key)
Stack Trace
TypeError: Cannot read property 'unique_key' of undefined
I need to be able to update the rent property value called status from 1 to 4 and setState again
To elaborate the comments, starting first with the most important:
Like #devserkan said, you should never mutate your state (and props), otherwise you start to see some really weird hard-to-make-sense bugs. When manipulating state, always create a copy of it. You can read more here.
Now for your question:
this.setState is asynchronous, so to get your state's updated value you should use a callback function
const rents = [...this.state.rents]; // create a copy
rents.splice(itemIndex, 1);
this.setState({ rents }, () => {
console.log(this.state.rents); // this will be up-to-date
});
console.log(this.state.rents); // this won't
Personally, I like using the filter method to remove items from the state and want to give an alternative solution. As we tried to explain in the comments and #Thiago Loddi's answer, you shouldn't mutate your state like this.
For arrays, use methods like map, filter, slice, concat to create new ones according to the situation. You can also use spread syntax to shallow copy your array. Then set your state using this new one. For objects, you can use Object.assign or spread syntax again to create new ones.
A warning, spread syntax and Object.assign creates shallow copies. If you mutate a nested property of this newly created object, you will mutate the original one. Just keep in mind, for this situation you need a deep copy or you should change the object again without mutating it somehow.
Here is the alternative solution with filter.
removeItem = itemIndex => {
const newRents = this.state.rents.filter((_, index) => index !== itemIndex);
this.setState({ rents: newRents });
};
If you want to log this new state, you can use a callback to setState but personally, I like to log the state in the render method. So here is one more alternative :)
render() {
console.log( this.state.rents );
...
}
I know how to do this but trying this way and not sure why it wont work?
drawCard = () => {
const deck = this.state.cards;
deck.shift();
console.log(deck, 'deck'); //this is correctly logging one less everytime
this.setState({cards: deck})
}
cards is just an of objects
so even though the function is being called and the console log is working, why is it not updating state?
(console.log(state.cards.length) always returns 3)
Don't use methods that mutate the state (for instance, Array#shift). You could instead use Array#slice to return a shallow copy of a portion of the array:
drawCard = () => {
this.setState({ cards: this.state.cards.slice(1) })
}
The problem arises because you are directly modifying the state. Although you are assigning the state to 'deck' remember that in Javascript arrays and objects are references. So when you are modifying deck you are actually trying to modify the state itself. You can use other methods to create a copy of the states values and modify that.
You may find this helpful:
React - Changing the state without using setState: Must avoid it?
in react, you can't just change the state,
you need to create a copy of your state before updating,
the easiest way to do it is just replace this:
const deck = this.state.cards;
into this:
const deck = [...this.state.cards];
For some reason I can't do this
this.state.something.map(obj => obj.id)
because it caused extra rerendering. How to get something from state, without assign it to a new variable?
I used to do this ugly hack
something_state_holder = this.state.something
something_state_holder.map(obj => obj.id)
but is there any better / more elegant way?
As #mayank-shukla said, what you are doing here is perfectly valid. The map() method iterates through an array and returns and array, but without mutating the iterated one. Here's what the MDN documentation says:
The map() method creates a new array with the results of calling a provided function on every element in this array.
map does not mutate the array on which it is called (although callback, if invoked, may do so).
However, should you want to make a shallow copy on an array, you could use slice:
something_state_holder = this.state.something.slice();
var resulting_array = something_state_holder.map(obj => obj.id);
This iterates through the copy, and not the state. What you did is not creating an array, you are simply assigning the reference to the same array to a new variable. So mutating that will mutate the state.