We Keep Coding

Immutable update pattern in react for nested data

Redux specifies that "The key to updating nested data is that every level of nesting must be copied and updated appropriately."
// changing reference in top level
const newState = {...oldState}
newState.x.y.z = 10;
setState(newState)
// or updating reference in all levels
const newState = {...oldState}
newState.x = {...newState.x}
newState.x.y = {..newState.x.y}
newState.x.y.z = 10
Is this is same for react, can't find the documentation regarding this on react.

Yes, you should apply this concept when updating your state in React also. If you don't, you can have issues with components not re-rendering when you update your state. Normally, React will rerender your component when your state changes, in both of your examples you're doing this, as you're creating a new object reference at the top-level which will cause React to rerender your component and any of its child components (ie: the children components also get rerender when the parent component rerenders). However, there is an exception to this. If you've memoized a component to help with efficiency using React.memo(), your memoized child component will only update when the props that it's passed change. If you are passing a child component an object that is nested within your original state, React won't rerender that component unless that object reference has changed. This could lead to issues if your memoized children components are trying to use state from your parent component.
For example:
const { useState, memo } = React;
const App = () => {
const [state, setState] = useState({
x: {
y: {
z: 0
}
}
});
const changeStateBad = () => {
// Your first technique (can cause issues)
const newState = {...state};
newState.x.y.z += 1;
setState(newState);
}
const changeStateGood = () => {
// Your second technique for updating at all levels (just rewritten slightly)
const newState = {
...state,
x: {
...state.x,
y: {
...state.x.y,
z: state.x.y.z + 1
}
}
};
setState(newState);
}
return <div>
<NumberDisplay x={state.x} />
<br />
<button onClick={changeStateGood}>Good update</button>
<br />
<button onClick={changeStateBad}>Bad update</button>
</div>
}
// A memoized component that only rerenders when its props update
const NumberDisplay = memo(({x}) => {
return <h1>{x.y.z}</h1>;
});
ReactDOM.render(<App />, document.body);
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/17.0.2/umd/react.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/17.0.2/umd/react-dom.production.min.js"></script>

data types in JS can be divided into primitive data types (eg. string, number) and non-primitive data types (eg. object),
primitive data types can not be modified (eg. using String.prototype.replace will always return a new instance of a string) while non-primitive data types can - and the reference pointing to that data will be "updated" as well (that's a big simplification, but executing eg. x.y = 2 will not create a new instance of x - instead the x will be keept the same in every place it's referenced),
which means to detect a change in the new version of the state (in a most performant way) it is required to create a new instance of an Object, Array (and other non-primitive data type representations)
// changing reference in top level
const newState = { ...oldState }
// changing nested reference
const newState = {
...oldState,
x: {
...oldState.x,
y: 2 // new "y" value
}
}
// changing nested reference, another example
const newState = {
...oldState,
x: {
...oldState.x,
y: {
...oldState.x.y,
z: 'test' // new "z" value
}
}
}
you can read more how change is detected on a basic level here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Guide/Working_with_Objects#comparing_objects

Several troubles making simple object inspector in React

I am javascript and React newbie, so I am still a little bit confused by thinking in React concept.
I am trying to make simple object inspector in React.
Here is property row element:
class PropertyRow extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
propertyName: this.props.propertyName,
propertyValue: this.props.propertyValue
};
alert(this.props.propertyName + " evoked in constructor");
}
render() {
return (
<div>{this.props.propertyName} = {this.props.propertyValue}</div>
// <div>{this.state.propertyName} = {this.state.propertyValue}</div>
);
}
}
here in the component PropertyRows I am trying to read all properties of an object dynamically.
class PropertyRows extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.createProRows = this.createProRows.bind(this);
}
createProRows(obj) {
const propArr = [];
for (const key of Object.keys(obj)) {
const val = obj[key];
propArr.push(<PropertyRow propertyName={key} propertyValue={val} />);
}
return propArr;
}
render() {
return <div>{this.createProRows(this.props.obj)}</div>;
}
}
And here I test this marvelous code
class Express extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
soldiers: 0,
captain:'John Maverick'
};
this.doClick = this.doClick.bind(this);
}
doClick() {
const obj = {
soldiers: this.state.soldiers + 1,
country:'Australia' //add new property
};
this.setState(obj);
}
render() {
return (
<div onClick={this.doClick}>
<PropertyRows obj={this.state} />
</div>
);
}
}
ReactDOM.render(<Express />, document.getElementById("root"));
When you click on the text, you will see incrementing "soldiers" property by one. The code is buggy and I do not understand why, or perhaps I do, but I have not absolutely no idea, what how to solve it in React metalanguage.
I would expect, that dynamically created array of <PropertyRow propertyName={key} propertyValue={val}/> would be nice way to browse object properties. But it seems, that the rendered HTML DOM objects are not destroyed and recreated. They are mysteriously reattached, when the new object in the doClick function is to be expressed.
Furthermore
When create another object in doClick, the property obj.captain is still there (in the browser window), probably because the underlying HTML DOM elements are not destroyed. Adding new property country: 'Australia' seems to work OK.
When I call <PropertyRow propertyName={key} propertyValue={val}/> the second time I would expect, that constructor would be fired, because it is created and pushed in the new array. But it is not. It is fired only for the new property country: 'Australia'
It seems, that I have to somehow destroy rendered HTML DOM elements in order to force react to recreate them. But how?
Or is there another way?
I deeply apologize for this long text. I hope it's not so complicated to read.
Thanx

delete obj.captain doesn't do anything because there's no captain key in obj. captain key exists in this.state, and deleting it from it is discouraged because React state is conventionally immutable.
The use of this.state together with this.setState may potentially result in race condition, state updater function should be used instead.
It should be:
doClick() {
this.setState(state => ({
soldiers: state.soldiers + 1,
country:'Australia',
captain: undefined
}));
}
The problem with PropertyRow is that it processes props once in constructor. PropertyRow constructor is fired only once because the component has been already mounted and now it is only updated on new props (here's illustrative diagram of React lifecycle hooks).
If a state is supposed to derive from received props, getDerivedStateFromProps hook should be used, it maps a state from props before initial render and next updates. In this case a state is not needed because state properties and props don't differ. It's enough to have:
class PropertyRow extends React.Component {
render() {
return (
<div>{this.props.propertyName} = {this.props.propertyValue}</div>
);
}
}
And PropertyRow could be rewritten as functional component because it doesn't benefit from being a class.

Update state of array nested inside object (ReactJS)

I have an object in state ("car") with multiple keys, one of which is an array ("features"). There's a couple things I'm trying to do with it.
I want to push another string (another feature) onto the "features" array every time I click the "Add Feature" button.
I want to be able to update the state of each string/feature in the "features" array when I type in the respective input.
I've researched this online quite a bit and haven't found anything (maybe because this isn't possible). Either way, here's my code:
class Car extends React.Component {
state = {
car: {make: 'Toyota', model: 'Camry', features: []},
}
handleChange = (e, index) => {
const value = e.target.value
let features = this.state.car.features.slice() // create mutable copy of array
features = features[index].concat(value)
this.setState({...this.state.car, features: features})
}
handleAddFeature = () => {
let features = this.state.car.features.slice()
features.push('')
this.setState({...this.state.car, features: features})
}
render() {
return (
{
this.state.car.features.map((f, index) => { return <input key={index} onChange={e => this.handleChange(e, index)}>{feature}</input>
}
<button onClick={this.handleAddFeature}>Add Feature</button>
)
}
}

Okay, I got this working in a very similar way to #Snkendall's answer. My handleChange function is listed below:
handleChange = (e, index,) => {
let array = this.state.car.features.slice() // create mutable copy of the array
array[index] = e.target.value // set the value of the feature at the index in question to e.target.value
const newObj = { ...this.state.car, features: array } // create a new object by spreading in the this.state.car and overriding features with our new array
this.setState({ car: newObj }) // set this.state.car to our new object
}
The difference between this solution and #Snkendall's is the defining of a newObj variable. That turns out to the be the only way to update an individual key nested inside a state object.

There are a few things that could be causing you problems... if your component has a state, you should use a constructor, and bind your 'this' references inside it to prevent 'this' from referencing the global. You just wrap your state like this:
class Car extends React.Component {
constructor() {
super()
this.state = {
car: {make: 'Toyota', model: 'Camry', features: []},
}
this.handleChange = this.handleChange.bind(this)
this.handleAddFeature = this.handleAddFeature.bind(this)
}
This is a really great article for thinking about 'this': http://2ality.com/2017/12/alternate-this.html
Another area that might cause you problems is features = features[index].concat(value)... because you're concatting the input tag's value onto the current string on state over and over again with every change (keystroke). You can just reset the value of the element at that index in the array like this:
handleChange = (e, index) => {
const value = e.target.value
let features = this.state.car.features.slice()
features[index] = value
this.setState({...this.state.car, features})
}
and that way, each keystroke just resets the value on state to reflect the change created in the input. You actually wouldn't need to use the handleAddFeature at all, since the state is already updated with handleChange.
I'm changing features:features to just features because ES6 destructuring has this fun thing where if a key and it's value is the same, you only need to reference it once, and it figures it out. It's just a cool way to keep your code even DRYer.

Ad.1
handleAddFeature = () => {
const car = this.state.car
car.features.push('Your feature')
this.setState({ car })
}
Just create copy and push to car features new value.
Ad. 2
Create component called e.g. Feature. He will have own state where you modify string and through props you can extract data to your "car".

How can I update state.item[1] in state using setState?

I'm creating an app where the user can design his own form. E.g. specify name of the field and details of which other columns that should be included.
The component is available as a JSFiddle.
My initial state looks like this:
var DynamicForm = React.createClass({
getInitialState: function() {
var items = {};
items[1] = { name: 'field 1', populate_at: 'web_start',
same_as: 'customer_name',
autocomplete_from: 'customer_name', title: '' };
items[2] = { name: 'field 2', populate_at: 'web_end',
same_as: 'user_name',
autocomplete_from: 'user_name', title: '' };
return { items };
},
render: function() {
var _this = this;
return (
<div>
{ Object.keys(this.state.items).map(function (key) {
var item = _this.state.items[key];
return (
<div>
<PopulateAtCheckboxes this={this}
checked={item.populate_at} id={key}
populate_at={data.populate_at} />
</div>
);
}, this)}
<button onClick={this.newFieldEntry}>Create a new field</button>
<button onClick={this.saveAndContinue}>Save and Continue</button>
</div>
);
}
I want to update the state when the user changes any of the values, but I'm having a hard time to target the correct object:
var PopulateAtCheckboxes = React.createClass({
handleChange: function (e) {
item = this.state.items[1];
item.name = 'newName';
items[1] = item;
this.setState({items: items});
},
render: function() {
var populateAtCheckbox = this.props.populate_at.map(function(value) {
return (
<label for={value}>
<input type="radio" name={'populate_at'+this.props.id} value={value}
onChange={this.handleChange} checked={this.props.checked == value}
ref="populate-at"/>
{value}
</label>
);
}, this);
return (
<div className="populate-at-checkboxes">
{populateAtCheckbox}
</div>
);
}
});
How should I craft this.setState to get it to update items[1].name ?

Here's how you can do it without helper libs:
handleChange: function (e) {
// 1. Make a shallow copy of the items
let items = [...this.state.items];
// 2. Make a shallow copy of the item you want to mutate
let item = {...items[1]};
// 3. Replace the property you're intested in
item.name = 'newName';
// 4. Put it back into our array. N.B. we *are* mutating the array here,
// but that's why we made a copy first
items[1] = item;
// 5. Set the state to our new copy
this.setState({items});
},
You can combine steps 2 and 3 if you want:
let item = {
...items[1],
name: 'newName'
}
Or you can do the whole thing in one line:
this.setState(({items}) => ({
items: [
...items.slice(0,1),
{
...items[1],
name: 'newName',
},
...items.slice(2)
]
}));
Note: I made items an array. OP used an object. However, the concepts are the same.
You can see what's going on in your terminal/console:
❯ node
> items = [{name:'foo'},{name:'bar'},{name:'baz'}]
[ { name: 'foo' }, { name: 'bar' }, { name: 'baz' } ]
> clone = [...items]
[ { name: 'foo' }, { name: 'bar' }, { name: 'baz' } ]
> item1 = {...clone[1]}
{ name: 'bar' }
> item1.name = 'bacon'
'bacon'
> clone[1] = item1
{ name: 'bacon' }
> clone
[ { name: 'foo' }, { name: 'bacon' }, { name: 'baz' } ]
> items
[ { name: 'foo' }, { name: 'bar' }, { name: 'baz' } ] // good! we didn't mutate `items`
> items === clone
false // these are different objects
> items[0] === clone[0]
true // we don't need to clone items 0 and 2 because we're not mutating them (efficiency gains!)
> items[1] === clone[1]
false // this guy we copied

You could use the update immutability helper for this:
this.setState({
items: update(this.state.items, {1: {name: {$set: 'updated field name'}}})
})
Or if you don't care about being able to detect changes to this item in a shouldComponentUpdate() lifecycle method using ===, you could edit the state directly and force the component to re-render - this is effectively the same as #limelights' answer, as it's pulling an object out of state and editing it.
this.state.items[1].name = 'updated field name'
this.forceUpdate()
Post-edit addition:
Check out the Simple Component Communication lesson from react-training for an example of how to pass a callback function from a state-holding parent to a child component which needs to trigger a state change.

Wrong way!
handleChange = (e) => {
const { items } = this.state;
items[1].name = e.target.value;
// update state
this.setState({
items,
});
};
As pointed out by a lot of better developers in the comments: mutating the state is wrong!
Took me a while to figure this out. Above works but it takes away the power of React. For example componentDidUpdate will not see this as an update because it's modified directly.
So the right way would be:
handleChange = (e) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
items: {
...prevState.items,
[prevState.items[1].name]: e.target.value,
},
}));
};

To modify deeply nested objects/variables in React's state, typically three methods are used: vanilla JavaScript's Object.assign, immutability-helper and cloneDeep from Lodash.
There are also plenty of other less popular third-party libs to achieve this, but in this answer, I'll cover just these three options. Also, some additional vanilla JavaScript methods exist, like array spreading, (see #mpen's answer for example), but they are not very intuitive, easy to use and capable to handle all state manipulation situations.
As was pointed innumerable times in top voted comments to the answers, whose authors propose a direct mutation of state: just don't do that. This is a ubiquitous React anti-pattern, which will inevitably lead to unwanted consequences. Learn the right way.
Let's compare three widely used methods.
Given this state object structure:
state = {
outer: {
inner: 'initial value'
}
}
You can use the following methods to update the inner-most inner field's value without affecting the rest of the state.
1. Vanilla JavaScript's Object.assign
const App = () => {
const [outer, setOuter] = React.useState({ inner: 'initial value' })
React.useEffect(() => {
console.log('Before the shallow copying:', outer.inner) // initial value
const newOuter = Object.assign({}, outer, { inner: 'updated value' })
console.log('After the shallow copy is taken, the value in the state is still:', outer.inner) // initial value
setOuter(newOuter)
}, [])
console.log('In render:', outer.inner)
return (
<section>Inner property: <i>{outer.inner}</i></section>
)
}
ReactDOM.render(
<App />,
document.getElementById('react')
)
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/16.10.2/umd/react.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/16.10.2/umd/react-dom.production.min.js"></script>
<main id="react"></main>
Keep in mind, that Object.assign will not perform a deep cloning, since it only copies property values, and that's why what it does is called a shallow copying (see comments).
For this to work, we should only manipulate the properties of primitive types (outer.inner), that is strings, numbers, booleans.
In this example, we're creating a new constant (const newOuter...), using Object.assign, which creates an empty object ({}), copies outer object ({ inner: 'initial value' }) into it and then copies a different object { inner: 'updated value' } over it.
This way, in the end the newly created newOuter constant will hold a value of { inner: 'updated value' } since the inner property got overridden. This newOuter is a brand new object, which is not linked to the object in state, so it can be mutated as needed and the state will stay the same and not changed until the command to update it is ran.
The last part is to use setOuter() setter to replace the original outer in the state with a newly created newOuter object (only the value will change, the property name outer will not).
Now imagine we have a more deep state like state = { outer: { inner: { innerMost: 'initial value' } } }. We could try to create the newOuter object and populate it with the outer contents from the state, but Object.assign will not be able to copy innerMost's value to this newly created newOuter object since innerMost is nested too deeply.
You could still copy inner, like in the example above, but since it's now an object and not a primitive, the reference from newOuter.inner will be copied to the outer.inner instead, which means that we will end up with local newOuter object directly tied to the object in the state.
That means that in this case mutations of the locally created newOuter.inner will directly affect the outer.inner object (in state), since they are in fact became the same thing (in computer's memory).
Object.assign therefore will only work if you have a relatively simple one level deep state structure with innermost members holding values of the primitive type.
If you have deeper objects (2nd level or more), which you should update, don't use Object.assign. You risk mutating state directly.
2. Lodash's cloneDeep
const App = () => {
const [outer, setOuter] = React.useState({ inner: 'initial value' })
React.useEffect(() => {
console.log('Before the deep cloning:', outer.inner) // initial value
const newOuter = _.cloneDeep(outer) // cloneDeep() is coming from the Lodash lib
newOuter.inner = 'updated value'
console.log('After the deeply cloned object is modified, the value in the state is still:', outer.inner) // initial value
setOuter(newOuter)
}, [])
console.log('In render:', outer.inner)
return (
<section>Inner property: <i>{outer.inner}</i></section>
)
}
ReactDOM.render(
<App />,
document.getElementById('react')
)
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/16.10.2/umd/react.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/16.10.2/umd/react-dom.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.15/lodash.min.js"></script>
<main id="react"></main>
Lodash's cloneDeep is way more simple to use. It performs a deep cloning, so it is a robust option, if you have a fairly complex state with multi-level objects or arrays inside. Just cloneDeep() the top-level state property, mutate the cloned part in whatever way you please, and setOuter() it back to the state.
3. immutability-helper
const App = () => {
const [outer, setOuter] = React.useState({ inner: 'initial value' })
React.useEffect(() => {
const update = immutabilityHelper
console.log('Before the deep cloning and updating:', outer.inner) // initial value
const newOuter = update(outer, { inner: { $set: 'updated value' } })
console.log('After the cloning and updating, the value in the state is still:', outer.inner) // initial value
setOuter(newOuter)
}, [])
console.log('In render:', outer.inner)
return (
<section>Inner property: <i>{outer.inner}</i></section>
)
}
ReactDOM.render(
<App />,
document.getElementById('react')
)
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/16.10.2/umd/react.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/16.10.2/umd/react-dom.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://wzrd.in/standalone/immutability-helper#3.0.0"></script>
<main id="react"></main>
immutability-helper takes it to a whole new level, and the cool thing about it is that it can not only $set values to state items, but also $push, $splice, $merge (etc.) them. Here is a list of commands available.
Side notes
Again, keep in mind, that setOuter only modifies the first-level properties of the state object (outer in these examples), not the deeply nested (outer.inner). If it behaved in a different way, this question wouldn't exist.
Which one is right for your project?
If you don't want or can't use external dependencies, and have a simple state structure, stick to Object.assign.
If you manipulate a huge and/or complex state, Lodash's cloneDeep is a wise choice.
If you need advanced capabilities, i.e. if your state structure is complex and you need to perform all kinds of operations on it, try immutability-helper, it's a very advanced tool which can be used for state manipulation.
...or, do you really need to do this at all?
If you hold a complex data in React's state, maybe this is a good time to think about other ways of handling it. Setting a complex state objects right in React components is not a straightforward operation, and I strongly suggest to think about different approaches.
Most likely you better be off keeping your complex data in a Redux store, setting it there using reducers and/or sagas and access it using selectors.

I had the same problem. Here's a simple solution that works !
const newItems = [...this.state.items];
newItems[item] = value;
this.setState({ items:newItems });

According to the React documentation on setState, using Object.assign as suggested by other answers here is not ideal. Due to the nature of setState's asynchronous behavior, subsequent calls using this technique may override previous calls causing undesirable outcomes.
Instead, the React docs recommend to use the updater form of setState which operates on the previous state. Keep in mind that when updating an array or object you must return a new array or object as React requires us to preserve state immutability. Using ES6 syntax's spread operator to shallow copy an array, creating or updating a property of an object at a given index of the array would look like this:
this.setState(prevState => {
const newItems = [...prevState.items];
newItems[index].name = newName;
return {items: newItems};
})

First get the item you want, change what you want on that object and set it back on the state.
The way you're using state by only passing an object in getInitialState would be way easier if you'd use a keyed object.
handleChange: function (e) {
item = this.state.items[1];
item.name = 'newName';
items[1] = item;
this.setState({items: items});
}

Don't mutate the state in place. It can cause unexpected results. I have learned my lesson! Always work with a copy/clone, Object.assign() is a good one:
item = Object.assign({}, this.state.items[1], {name: 'newName'});
items[1] = item;
this.setState({items: items});
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/assign

Use array map with arrow function, in one line
this.setState({
items: this.state.items.map((item, index) =>
index === 1 ? { ...item, name: 'newName' } : item,
)
})

Sometimes in React, mutating the cloned array can affect the original one, this method will never cause mutation:
const myNewArray = Object.assign([...myArray], {
[index]: myNewItem
});
setState({ myArray: myNewArray });
Or if you just want to update a property of an item:
const myNewArray = Object.assign([...myArray], {
[index]: {
...myArray[index],
prop: myNewValue
}
});
setState({ myArray: myNewArray });

As none of the above options was ideal to me I ended up using map:
this.setState({items: this.state.items.map((item,idx)=> idx!==1 ?item :{...item,name:'new_name'}) })

Mutation free:
// given a state
state = {items: [{name: 'Fred', value: 1}, {name: 'Wilma', value: 2}]}
// This will work without mutation as it clones the modified item in the map:
this.state.items
.map(item => item.name === 'Fred' ? {...item, ...{value: 3}} : item)
this.setState(newItems)

It's really simple.
First pull the entire items object from state, updated the part of the items object as desired, and put the entire items object back in state via setState.
handleChange: function (e) {
items = Object.assign(this.state.items); // Pull the entire items object out. Using object.assign is a good idea for objects.
items[1].name = 'newName'; // update the items object as needed
this.setState({ items }); // Put back in state
}

Found this surprisingly hard and none of the ES6 spread magic seemed to work as expected.
Was using a structure like this to get rendered element properties for layout purposes.
found using the update method from immutability-helper to be the most straight forward one in this simplified example:
constructor(props) {
super(props)
this.state = { values: [] }
this.updateContainerState = this.updateContainerState.bind(this)
}
updateContainerState(index, value) {
this.setState((state) => update(state, { values: { [index]: { $set: value } } }))
}
as adapted from https://github.com/kolodny/immutability-helper#computed-property-names
of the to be updated array member is a more nested complex object use the appropriate deep copy method based on complexity.
There are surely better ways to handle layout parameters, but this is about how to handle arrays. The relevant values for each child element could also be computed outside of them, but I found it more convenient to pass containerState down, so they childs can fetch properties at will and Update the parent state array at their given index.
import React from 'react'
import update from 'immutability-helper'
import { ContainerElement } from './container.component.style.js'
import ChildComponent from './child-component'
export default class ContainerComponent extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props)
this.state = { values: [] }
this.updateContainerState = this.updateContainerState.bind(this)
}
updateContainerState(index, value) {
this.setState((state) => update(state, { values: { [index]: { $set: value } } }))
}
// ...
render() {
let index = 0
return (
<ContainerElement>
<ChildComponent
index={index++}
containerState={this.state}
updateContainerState={this.updateContainerState}
/>
<ChildComponent
index={index++}
containerState={this.state}
updateContainerState={this.updateContainerState}
/>
</ContainerElement>
)
}
}

#JonnyBuchanan's answer works perfectly, but for only array state variable. In case the state variable is just a single dictionary, follow this:
inputChange = input => e => {
this.setState({
item: update(this.state.item, {[input]: {$set: e.target.value}})
})
}
You can replace [input] by the field name of your dictionary and e.target.value by its value. This code performs the update job on input change event of my form.

Use the event on handleChange to figure out the element that has changed and then update it. For that you might need to change some property to identify it and update it.
See fiddle https://jsfiddle.net/69z2wepo/6164/

I would move the function handle change and add an index parameter
handleChange: function (index) {
var items = this.state.items;
items[index].name = 'newName';
this.setState({items: items});
},
to the Dynamic form component and pass it to the PopulateAtCheckboxes component as a prop. As you loop over your items you can include an additional counter (called index in the code below) to be passed along to the handle change as shown below
{ Object.keys(this.state.items).map(function (key, index) {
var item = _this.state.items[key];
var boundHandleChange = _this.handleChange.bind(_this, index);
return (
<div>
<PopulateAtCheckboxes this={this}
checked={item.populate_at} id={key}
handleChange={boundHandleChange}
populate_at={data.populate_at} />
</div>
);
}, this)}
Finally you can call your change listener as shown below here
<input type="radio" name={'populate_at'+this.props.id} value={value} onChange={this.props.handleChange} checked={this.props.checked == value} ref="populate-at"/>

If you need to change only part of the Array,
You've a react component with state set to.
state = {items: [{name: 'red-one', value: 100}, {name: 'green-one', value: 999}]}
It's best to update the red-one in the Array as follows:
const itemIndex = this.state.items.findIndex(i=> i.name === 'red-one');
const newItems = [
this.state.items.slice(0, itemIndex),
{name: 'red-one', value: 666},
this.state.items.slice(itemIndex)
]
this.setState(newItems)

or if you have a dynamically generated list and you don't know the index but just have the key or id:
let ItemsCopy = []
let x = this.state.Items.map((entry) =>{
if(entry.id == 'theIDYoureLookingFor')
{
entry.PropertyToChange = 'NewProperty'
}
ItemsCopy.push(entry)
})
this.setState({Items:ItemsCopy});

Try with code:
this.state.items[1] = 'new value';
var cloneObj = Object.assign({}, this.state.items);
this.setState({items: cloneObj });

Following piece of code went easy on my dull brain. Removing the object and replacing with the updated one
var udpateditem = this.state.items.find(function(item) {
return item.name == "field_1" });
udpateditem.name= "New updated name"
this.setState(prevState => ({
items:prevState.dl_name_template.filter(function(item) {
return item.name !== "field_1"}).concat(udpateditem)
}));

How about creating another component(for object that needs to go into the array) and pass the following as props?
component index - index will be used to create/update in array.
set function - This function put data into the array based on the component index.
<SubObjectForm setData={this.setSubObjectData} objectIndex={index}/>
Here {index} can be passed in based on position where this SubObjectForm is used.
and setSubObjectData can be something like this.
setSubObjectData: function(index, data){
var arrayFromParentObject= <retrieve from props or state>;
var objectInArray= arrayFromParentObject.array[index];
arrayFromParentObject.array[index] = Object.assign(objectInArray, data);
}
In SubObjectForm, this.props.setData can be called on data change as given below.
<input type="text" name="name" onChange={(e) => this.props.setData(this.props.objectIndex,{name: e.target.value})}/>

this.setState({
items: this.state.items.map((item,index) => {
if (index === 1) {
item.name = 'newName';
}
return item;
})
});

handleChanges = (value, key) => {
// clone the current State object
let cloneObject = _.extend({}, this.state.currentAttribute);
// key as user.name and value= "ABC" then current attributes have current properties as we changes
currentAttribute[key] = value;
// then set the state "currentAttribute" is key and "cloneObject" is changed object.
this.setState({currentAttribute: cloneObject});
and Change from Text box add onChange event
onChange = {
(event) => {
this.handleChanges(event.target.value, "title");
}
}

Try this it will definetly work,other case i tried but didn't work
import _ from 'lodash';
this.state.var_name = _.assign(this.state.var_name, {
obj_prop: 'changed_value',
});

this.setState isn't merging states as I would expect

I have the following state:
this.setState({ selected: { id: 1, name: 'Foobar' } });
Then I update the state:
this.setState({ selected: { name: 'Barfoo' }});
Since setState is suppose to merge I would expect it to be:
{ selected: { id: 1, name: 'Barfoo' } };
But instead it eats the id and the state is:
{ selected: { name: 'Barfoo' } };
Is this expected behavior and what's the solution to update only one property of a nested state object?

I think setState() doesn't do recursive merge.
You can use the value of the current state this.state.selected to construct a new state and then call setState() on that:
var newSelected = _.extend({}, this.state.selected);
newSelected.name = 'Barfoo';
this.setState({ selected: newSelected });
I've used function _.extend() function (from underscore.js library) here to prevent modification to the existing selected part of the state by creating a shallow copy of it.
Another solution would be to write setStateRecursively() which does recursive merge on a new state and then calls replaceState() with it:
setStateRecursively: function(stateUpdate, callback) {
var newState = mergeStateRecursively(this.state, stateUpdate);
this.replaceState(newState, callback);
}

Immutability helpers were recently added to React.addons, so with that, you can now do something like:
var newState = React.addons.update(this.state, {
selected: {
name: { $set: 'Barfoo' }
}
});
this.setState(newState);
Immutability helpers documentation.

Since many of the answers use the current state as a basis for merging in new data, I wanted to point out that this can break. State changes are queued, and do not immediately modify a component's state object. Referencing state data before the queue has been processed will therefore give you stale data that does not reflect the pending changes you made in setState. From the docs:
setState() does not immediately mutate this.state but creates a pending state transition. Accessing this.state after calling this method can potentially return the existing value.
This means using "current" state as a reference in subsequent calls to setState is unreliable. For example:
First call to setState, queuing a change to state object
Second call to setState. Your state uses nested objects, so you want to perform a merge. Before calling setState, you get current state object. This object does not reflect queued changes made in first call to setState, above, because it's still the original state, which should now be considered "stale".
Perform merge. Result is original "stale" state plus new data you just set, changes from initial setState call are not reflected. Your setState call queues this second change.
React processes queue. First setState call is processed, updating state. Second setState call is processed, updating state. The second setState's object has now replaced the first, and since the data you had when making that call was stale, the modified stale data from this second call has clobbered the changes made in the first call, which are lost.
When queue is empty, React determines whether to render etc. At this point you will render the changes made in the second setState call, and it will be as though the first setState call never happened.
If you need to use the current state (e.g. to merge data into a nested object), setState alternatively accepts a function as an argument instead of an object; the function is called after any previous updates to state, and passes the state as an argument -- so this can be used to make atomic changes guaranteed to respect previous changes.

I didn't want to install another library so here's yet another solution.
Instead of:
this.setState({ selected: { name: 'Barfoo' }});
Do this instead:
var newSelected = Object.assign({}, this.state.selected);
newSelected.name = 'Barfoo';
this.setState({ selected: newSelected });
Or, thanks to #icc97 in the comments, even more succinctly but arguably less readable:
this.setState({ selected: Object.assign({}, this.state.selected, { name: "Barfoo" }) });
Also, to be clear, this answer doesn't violate any of the concerns that #bgannonpl mentioned above.

Preserving the previous state based on #bgannonpl answer:
Lodash example:
this.setState((previousState) => _.merge({}, previousState, { selected: { name: "Barfood"} }));
To check that it's worked properly, you can use the second parameter function callback:
this.setState((previousState) => _.merge({}, previousState, { selected: { name: "Barfood"} }), () => alert(this.state.selected));
I used merge because extend discards the other properties otherwise.
React Immutability example:
import update from "react-addons-update";
this.setState((previousState) => update(previousState, {
selected:
{
name: {$set: "Barfood"}
}
});

As of right now,
If the next state depends on the previous state, we recommend using
the updater function form, instead:
according to documentation https://reactjs.org/docs/react-component.html#setstate, using:
this.setState((prevState) => {
return {quantity: prevState.quantity + 1};
});

My solution for this kind of situation is to use, like another answer pointed out, the Immutability helpers.
Since setting the state in depth is a common situation, I've created the folowing mixin:
var SeStateInDepthMixin = {
setStateInDepth: function(updatePath) {
this.setState(React.addons.update(this.state, updatePath););
}
};
This mixin is included in most of my components and I generally do not use setState directly anymore.
With this mixin, all you need to do in order to achieve the desired effect is to call the function setStateinDepth in the following way:
setStateInDepth({ selected: { name: { $set: 'Barfoo' }}})
For more information:
On how mixins work in React, see the official documentation
On the syntax of the parameter passed to setStateinDepth see the Immutability Helpers documentation.

I am using es6 classes, and I ended up with several complex objects on my top state and was trying to make my main component more modular, so i created a simple class wrapper to keep the state on the top component but allow for more local logic.
The wrapper class takes a function as its constructor that sets a property on the main component state.
export default class StateWrapper {
constructor(setState, initialProps = []) {
this.setState = props => {
this.state = {...this.state, ...props}
setState(this.state)
}
this.props = initialProps
}
render() {
return(<div>render() not defined</div>)
}
component = props => {
this.props = {...this.props, ...props}
return this.render()
}
}
Then for each complex property on the top state, i create one StateWrapped class. You can set the default props in the constructor here and they will be set when the class is initialised, you can refer to the local state for values and set the local state, refer to local functions, and have it passed up the chain:
class WrappedFoo extends StateWrapper {
constructor(...props) {
super(...props)
this.state = {foo: "bar"}
}
render = () => <div onClick={this.props.onClick||this.onClick}>{this.state.foo}</div>
onClick = () => this.setState({foo: "baz"})
}
So then my top level component just needs the constructor to set each class to it's top level state property, a simple render, and any functions that communicate cross-component.
class TopComponent extends React.Component {
constructor(...props) {
super(...props)
this.foo = new WrappedFoo(
props => this.setState({
fooProps: props
})
)
this.foo2 = new WrappedFoo(
props => this.setState({
foo2Props: props
})
)
this.state = {
fooProps: this.foo.state,
foo2Props: this.foo.state,
}
}
render() {
return(
<div>
<this.foo.component onClick={this.onClickFoo} />
<this.foo2.component />
</div>
)
}
onClickFoo = () => this.foo2.setState({foo: "foo changed foo2!"})
}
Seems to work quite well for my purposes, bear in mind though you can't change the state of the properties you assign to wrapped components at the top level component as each wrapped component is tracking its own state but updating the state on the top component each time it changes.

Solution
Edit: This solution used to use spread syntax. The goal was make an object without any references to prevState, so that prevState wouldn't be modified. But in my usage, prevState appeared to be modified sometimes. So, for perfect cloning without side effects, we now convert prevState to JSON, and then back again. (Inspiration to use JSON came from MDN.)
Remember:
State updates are shallow: they only go one level deep
State shouldn't be directly mutated. Instead, use setState(prevState => stateChange)
Steps
Make a copy of the root-level property of state that you want to change
Mutate this new object
Create an update object
Return the update
Steps 3 and 4 can be combined on one line.
Example
this.setState(prevState => {
var newSelected = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(prevState.selected)) //1
newSelected.name = 'Barfoo'; //2
var update = { selected: newSelected }; //3
return update; //4
});
Simplified example:
this.setState(prevState => {
var selected = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(prevState.selected)) //1
selected.name = 'Barfoo'; //2
return { selected }; //3, 4
});
This follows the React guidelines nicely. Based on eicksl's answer to a similar question.

ES6 solution
We set the state initially
this.setState({ selected: { id: 1, name: 'Foobar' } });
//this.state: { selected: { id: 1, name: 'Foobar' } }
We are changeing a property on some level of the state object:
const { selected: _selected } = this.state
const selected = { ..._selected, name: 'Barfoo' }
this.setState({selected})
//this.state: { selected: { id: 1, name: 'Barfoo' } }

React state doesn't perform the recursive merge in setState while expects that there won't be in-place state member updates at the same time. You either have to copy enclosed objects/arrays yourself (with array.slice or Object.assign) or use the dedicated library.
Like this one. NestedLink directly supports handling of the compound React state.
this.linkAt( 'selected' ).at( 'name' ).set( 'Barfoo' );
Also, the link to the selected or selected.name can be passed everywhere as a single prop and modified there with set.

have you set the initial state?
I'll use some of my own code for example:
getInitialState: function () {
return {
dragPosition: {
top : 0,
left : 0
},
editValue : "",
dragging : false,
editing : false
};
}
In an app I'm working on, this is how I've been setting and using state. I believe on setState you can then just edit whatever states you want individually I've been calling it like so:
onChange: function (event) {
event.preventDefault();
event.stopPropagation();
this.setState({editValue: event.target.value});
},
Keep in mind you have to set the state within the React.createClass function that you called getInitialState

I use the tmp var to change.
changeTheme(v) {
let tmp = this.state.tableData
tmp.theme = v
this.setState({
tableData : tmp
})
}