I have a component that has a callback. It depends on an array of plain old objects stored in redux which won't change very often while the component itself will change its state pretty frequently. Some subcomponents should be rerendered on those state changes, but the one that uses the callback, should not.
What's the best approach to making an array a dependency of useCallback()? So far, I've been using
const handleAllItemsSelectedChange = useCallback(
checked => {
if (checked) {
dispatch(setSelected(items));
} else {
dispatch(selectSelected([]));
}
},
// eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
[JSON.stringify(items)]
);
This doesn't seem ideal, and potentially slower than just rerendering the component every time. I can't imagine this isn't a very common use-case. The React team surely has a best practice for this, right? I can't find it in the documentation.
JSON.stringify or any deep comparison is going to be inefficient and slow. React has no plans to support it
Depending on whether you add or remove items (if not mutating the objects) you can just compare with items.length. Or you could possibly save performance by just creating the function each time, as opposed to trying to save performance putting it in a useCallback.
It's a case by case scenario
In redux reducer every time the array changes you have to create new array. So, your array becomes immutable and you can use it for dependency by reference. Example below just demonstrates the principle.
function reducer(state, action) {
switch(action.type) {
case "addItem":
return {...state, items: [...state.items, action.value]};
case "changeProp":
return {...state, prop: action.value}
default:
return state;
}
}
As you can see every time the array changes you'll get the new instance of the array. That means you can use it by reference and don't need to strignify it anymore:
const handleAction = useCallback(checked=>{
....
}, [items]);
By the way immutability is the approach recommended by redux documentation
Related
I have this code which has plenty of inputs, one for each price value to modify it.
As the amount of inputs is high (3 prices per tarification, 3 tarifications per area), in order not to rerender everything each time, I'm using useMemo on the function that updates the value of the inputs and aside of this, I'm using useReducer to avoid having a very long code to control inputs.
However, inserting characters (or numbers in this case) in the inputs is not instant as it should be, instead it takes a short time for them to appear, not to mention consecutive inputs.
const handleUpdate = useMemo(
() => (property, valu, obid) => {
dispatch({ type: "UPDATE_DATA", property, payload: valu, id: obid });
},
[dispatch]
);
And the reducer:
function reducer(state, action) {
switch (action.type) {
...
case "UPDATE_DATA":
return {
...state,
data: state.data.map((item) => {
if (item.id === action.id) {
return { ...item, [action.property]: action.payload };
}
return item;
}),
};
}
}
I suggest checking the whole code as the problem (or solution) could be somewhere else. In order to see the whole code, you can refer to this sandcodebox link. Excuse the bad css formating as I copied just some part of it.
Note that the fetch function has been replaced by a long array simulating the data.
https://codesandbox.io/s/unruffled-feynman-g9nox2?file=/src/App.js
The point of useMemo generally is to cache the values of expensive calculations done during rendering. However, in your case, you do not have any expensive rendering calculations; you are just rendering a really large tree every time an input changes. In fact, because all your state is on the App component, you rerender the entire app every time.
The way to optimize this in React is to skip rendering components when possible. To do so, split unrelated pieces of the page into distinct components. Once you separate the logic, wrap it with React.memo(), which is a different optimization technique that can skip the rendering of a component altogether.
To me, the most obvious changes you can make are:
Move TodosDatos outside the App component because it is constant and doesn't need to be redefined on every render (which can be memory-intensive).
Move your <Table> into a new component that you memoize with React.memo(). Make sure to pass all the table's dependency values into the new component's props.
I implemented these changes here: https://codesandbox.io/s/green-breeze-mmum6n?file=/src/App.js. You should notice now that typing is nearly instantaneous. You can probably optimize it in several other places too for even better performance.
I am learning Redux Toolkit. From a React POV it seems very intuitive to access whatever part of the state you need from within useSelector using an inline arrow function, and then conduct any calculations. As an example consider a cart item with its data (like item count) in redux store.
function CartItemCounter({ itemId }){
const cart = useSelector(state => state.cart);
const itemInCart = cart.items[itemId];
const count = itemInCart?.count || 0;
return <div>{itemId} - {count} nos</div>
}
But I'm seeing all this information saying you should define your selectors beside your slice, use createSelector and all. What is the right way, and why is it better?
The information that is out there is essentially talking about different levels of optimization while using useSelector.
What you need to understand before anything else, is how useSelector works internally.
How does useSelector work?
When you pass a function to useSelector (obviously inside a react component), it essentially hooks on to the global redux state. Whenever any change happens in any part of the global state (i.e. when dispatch() is called from any part of the app), redux will run all the functions you passed to useSelector in your app, and perform certain checks.
Redux will take the result from each function, and compare it to the value it got the last time it ran the same function.
How does it make this comparison?
It uses a reference equality for this comparison. So if redux has to think that the result of the function hasn't changed, either the value returned from the function has to be a primitive and equal.
4 === 4 // true
'itemA' === 'itemA // true
Or, the value returned must be a derived data type (arrays, objects), with the same reference. So essentially the same object.
const x = { name: 'Shashi' }
const fn1 = () => x;
const fn2 = () => x;
const fn3 = () => { name: 'Shashi' }
fn1() === fn2(); // true
fn1() === fn3(); // false, because the objects are different, with different references
In practice, redux changes the wrapping object if either a key (or key of a nested object) is changed, or you manually change the entire object using a dispatch action (This is related to the immer library integration). This is similar to how you would do in regular React.
/* See how most keys are spread in, and will hence maintain reference equality.
While certain keys like 'first', 'first.second', 'first.second[action.someId]'
are changed with new objects, and so will break reference equality */
function handwrittenReducer(state, action) {
return {
...state,
first: {
...state.first,
second: {
...state.first.second,
[action.someId]: {
...state.first.second[action.someId],
fourth: action.someValue,
},
},
},
}
}
Otherwise it maintains the same objects within its state, and returns the exact same objects with the same references, when you access them. To verify this, if you access your cart twice, its literally going to be the same object.
const cart1 = useSelector(state => state.cart)
const cart2 = useSelector(state => state.cart)
cart1 === cart2; // true
What does it do with this comparison?
If the comparison returns true, i.e. the new value is the same as the old value, Redux tells that instance of useSelector to chill tf out, and not do anything. If it returns false however, it tells that component to re-render. After all, the value you are accessing from state has "changed"(according to Redux laws), so you probably want to show the new value.
With this information, we can make change the kind of function we pass to the useSelector, in order to get certain optimization benefits.
Optimization Levels
Level 0: Accessing slice data inline
const cart = useSelector(state => state.cart)
// extract the information you need from within the cart
const itemInCart = cart.items[itemId];
const count = itemInCart?.count || 0;
This is not a good way to access the data. You actually need a subset of the data from the cart, but you are fetching the whole thing, and doing the calculation outside the selector.
Problems:
When you put stuff like this inline, what happens if you change the shape of your data in the future? You have to go to every place that uses useSelector and manually change it. Not so good.
More importantly, every time any part of the cart changes, the entire cart object actually changes. So Redux sees your component that asks for the cart, and thinks
The cart has changed. This component is asking for the cart. It should probably re-render.
BAM Every single instance of this component rerenders. And for what? The count of the item you're referencing probably didn't change. So ideally there shouldn't have been a re-render.
Level 1: Centralize the selector
An easy optimization is to put the selector function in a centralized location next to your slice. That way, if your data shape changes in the future, you can just change it in one place, and your whole app (wherever it uses that data) will work with the new shape.
// inside or next to the slice file
const selectCart = (state) => state.cart
//...
// somewhere inside a react component
const cart = useSelector(selectCart)
Level 2: Access the relevant data
Since redux is comparing the results of your selector function, if you want to avoid unnecessary rerenders, you want to make sure the results have reference equality (===). So target the exact value you wish to look at, in your selector.
// extract the information you need from within the cart, *within the selector*
const count = useSelector(state => state.cart.items[itemId]?.count || 0)
// You don't have to use a one-liner, a multi-line function is better for readability
When Redux executes these functions, it keeps a record of the value returned from these selector functions, for each individual useSelector. This time the values are going to be the same for every single counter, except the one that actually changed. All those other counters that didn't actually change in value don't have to unnecessarily re-render anymore!
And if any of you folks think this is premature optimization, the answer's no. This is more along the lines of putting a dependancy array on your useEffects to avoid infinite loops.
Not forgetting the Level 1 optimization, we can also extract this function centrally
const selectItemById = (state, itemId) => (state.cart.items[itemId]?.count || 0);
function CartItemCounter({ itemId }){
//...
// somewhere inside a react component
const count = useSelector((state) => selectCart(state, itemId))
//...
}
So that solves all of our problems right?
For now, yes. But what if this selector function has to run some expensive computation.
const selectSomething = (state) => reallyExpensiveFn(state.cart)
//...
// somewhere inside a react component
const cart = useSelector(selectSomething)
You don't want to keep running that do you?
Or what if you have no option but to return new objects from your select function. A common scenario for this case would be returning a subset of data from the state.
const selectFilteredItems = (state) => state.itemsArray.filter(checkCondition) // the filter method will always return a new array
//...
// somewhere inside a react component
const cart = useSelector(selectFilteredItems) // re-renders every time
To solve this you would have to memoize or cache the results from the function call. Essentially you would need to make sure that if the input arguments are the same, the result will maintain reference equality with the previous result. This introduces the need to maintain some kind of cache state.
Level 3: createSelector
Fortunately, Reselect library, which is reexported with Redux Tookit, does this work for you. You can take a look at the redux toolkit for the syntax.
const selectFilteredItems = createSelector(
(state) => state.itemsArray, // the first argument accesses relevant data from global state
(itemsArray) => itemsArray.filter(checkCondition) // the second parameter conducts the transformation
)
//...
// somewhere inside a react component
const cart = useSelector(selectFilteredItems) // re-renders only when needed
Here the second function is called the transformation function, and is where we put the expensive computation, or the function that returns inconsistent references as a result (filter,map etc).
The createSelector caches
a) the arguments to the transformation function
b) the result of the transformation function
of the previous call to the selectFilteredItems function. If the arguments are the same, it skips executing the transformation function, and gives you the result you got the last time it was executed.
So when useSelector looks at the result, it gets reference equality. Hence the re-render is skipped!
One little caveat here is that createSelector only caches the very previous result. This makes sense if you think about a single component. In a single component you are only concerned about differences in values and results compared to the previous render. But in practice, you are likely to share selectors across multiple components. If this happens, you have a single cache location, and multiple components using this cache. i.e. Stuff breaks.
Level 4: createSelector factory function
Since the logic for your selector is the same, what you need to do is run createSelector for each component that uses it. This creates a cache for each component, giving us the desired behaviour. In order to do this, we use a factory function.
const makeSelectFilteredItems = () => createSelector(
(state) => state.itemsArray, // the first argument accesses relevant data from global state
(itemsArray) => itemsArray.filter(checkCondition) // the second parameter conducts the transformation
)
//...
// somewhere inside a react component
const selectFilteredItems = useMemo(makeSelectFilteredItems,[]); // make a new selector for each component, when it mounts
const cart = useSelector(selectFilteredItems) // re-renders only when needed
You intend to make a new selector (and by extension, cache) for each new component that mounts. So you put it inside the actual component function and not on the module scope. But this will re-run makeFilteredSelector for each render, and hence create a new selector for each render, and hence eliminate the cache. This is why you need to wrap the function in a useMemo with an empty dependency array. It runs on every mount.
And voila!
You now know where, why and how to use selectors in Redux. I personally feel that the createSelector syntaxes are slightly contrived. There is some discussion on changing cache sizes going on. But for now I feel that sticking to the docs should get you through most situations.
But I'm seeing all this information saying you should define your selectors beside your slice, use createSelector and all.
That's the way to go if you're deriving something from the state, which ends up being an expensive computation or something that's reused often throughout your app. Imagine, for example, your state.cart can contain 50.000 items and you need to sort them from most expensive item to least expensive. You don't want to re-calculate this all the time because it slows your app down. So you cache/memoize the result.
What is the right way, and why is it better?
The right way is to use memoization helpers like createSelector when/if you want to avoid expensive computation. Most people optimize prematurely, so I'd just stick to useSelector and keep it simple if in doubt.
When it comes to handling complex state in React everybody suggests to flatten the state to avoid something like this just to update a single property:
setState({ …state, user:{ …state.user, profile:{…state.user.profile, address:{…state.user.profile.address, city:’Newyork’}} }});
Which is really cubersome to work with. There is another way: use an object holding your state and return that from a memoized function. Then whenever you made a change simply force a re-render.
// note the reference cannot be changed, but values can.
const data = useMemo(() => ({
user: {
name: "",
profile: {
address: {
city: "New york"
}
}
}
}), []);
// use dummy data to trigger an update
const [toggle, setToggle] = useState(false);
function forceUpdate() {
setToggle(prev => !prev);
}
function makeChanges() {
// make any change on data without any copying.
data.user.address.city = "new city name";
// hydrate the changes to the view when you're done
forceUpdate();
}
return (
<div onClick={() => makeChanges()}>{data.user.address.city }</div>
)
Which works perfectly. Even with massive and complex data structures.
From what I can tell state is really just a memoized values which will trigger an update upon change.
So, my one question: What is the downside of using this?
The docs say useMemo is not a guarantee:
You may rely on useMemo as a performance optimization, not as a semantic guarantee. In the future, React may choose to “forget” some previously memoized values [...]
If you'd really want to do something like this and you are absolutely positively sure you're willing to do things unlike anyone else in React land, you'd use useRef for state storage that doesn't cause rerenders by itself. I'm not going to add an example of that, because I don't recommend it in the least.
You should also note that your method will not cause memoized (React.memo()) components to rerender, since they will not "see" changes to props if their identity does not change. Similarly, if another component uses one of your internally mutated objects as a dependency for e.g. an effect, those effects will not fire. Finding bugs caused by that will be spectacularly annoying.
If modifying deep object structures is otherwise cumbersome, see e.g. the Immer library, which does Proxy magic internally to let you modify deep objects without trouble – or maybe immutability-helper if you're feeling more old-school.
I have nested arrays in my props, and the user can re-order the second-level array by dragging and dropping column. I (using redux) make a shallow copy of getState's outer array, do the re-ordering (through re-assignment of array objects based on index), and return the new array to the state (using spread operator in my reducer). However, componentDidUpdate is not called if this ordering is the first thing I do after page load. If I take other actions that update the props/state, and then attempt to re-order, the ordering works fine and componentDidUpdate is called.
In the former situation, where ordering is the first thing I try to do after page load/refresh, the render function is hit (with the properly re-ordered props) but the DOM never updates, presumably because redux does not recognize a state change?
It just seems like some other props change (even if unrelated to arrays) "wakes up" redux or connect and allows it to recognize changes.
Here's where I copy, dispatch and then release the updated state in the reducer:
in actionCreator method:
...
const newProjects = getState().tracker.projects.slice().map(p => {
if (p.innerArray) {
const from = p.innerArray[draggedId-1];
const to = p.innerArray[droppedId-1];
p.innerArray[draggedId - 1] = { ...to, order: draggedId };
p.innerArray[droppedId - 1] = { ...from, order: droppedId };
}
return p;
})
dispatch({ type: 'RECEIVE_FIELD_UPDATE', projects: newProjects, message: "Sorted" });
reducer:
case 'RECEIVE_FIELD_UPDATE':
return {
...state,
projects: action.projects,
message: action.message
}
As you can see, I'm not mutating state in the reducer or doing other anti-pattern things (as far as I'm aware).
FWIW, the "Sorted" value on message property seems to get through whether or not componentDidUpdate is hit (I have a modal that pops up with the message to confirm).
Any pointers or related documentation would be helpful; I've been reading all I can find, including other StackOverflow posts, but to no avail.
UPDATE
Solved the issue, it did have to do with redux not diff-ing the properties but not because of what I expected, read below if interested.
Figured this out, and per usual I was looking in the wrong place.
The issue was that my conditional check on page load to prevent re-loading of already stored data was preventing any dispatches from firing. When I looked in the reducer, the sub-arrays of the projects were identical after dragging, because the state had not been previously connected yet. I thought a hard refresh would cause a full re-load but apparently I need to read more about how redux stores data and how to refresh that.
Anyways, fixing this condition so that I get new data on page load fixed the issue and componentDidUpdate is now being triggered consistently.
When updating state in a reducer in an array format, I've had to spread state again in order for updates to happen and keep from mutating.
case 'RECEIVE_FIELD_UPDATE':
return {
...state,
projects: ...state, ...action.projects,
message: action.message
}
or...
case 'RECEIVE_FIELD_UPDATE':
return {
...state,
projects: [...state, ...action.projects],
message: action.message
}
Depending on the format.
Hope that helps.
I am in the early development stage of a React+Redux game and have followed Redux best practices: pure reducer, presentational/container component separation, using getState() only in Reducer (as opposed to in action creator) etc. The app seems to be working as expected but when I try to reverse an action using Time Travel, even though the state property map[][] and it's computed connected component prop change as expected, the result doesn't get reflected on the UI properly (specifically the player position on the map doesn't follow what state dictates). When I inspect the state changes I can see that all necessary changes are correctly taking place between different states. Here is my reducer:
const gridReducer = (state, action) => {
if (typeof state === 'undefined'){
let dungeon = new Dungeon();
dungeon.generate();
return {
boardWidth: Math.floor(((70/100) * window.innerWidth) / 20),
boardHeight: Math.floor(((70/100) * window.innerHeight) / 20),
map: dungeon.map,
position: dungeon.playerPosition
}
}
switch (action.type) {
case 'GRID_RESIZE':
return {...state,
boardWidth: action.newBoardWidth,
boardHeight: action.newBoardHeight
}
//This is where I have the issue, map correctly changes both when interacting with the game and when reversing using time travel however the UI fails to update (only in reverse)!
case 'MOVE':
let dungeonObj = new Dungeon(state.map.slice(), {...state.position});
if (dungeonObj.movePlayer(action.direction)) {
return {...state,
position: dungeonObj.playerPosition,
map: dungeonObj.map
}
} else return state;
default:
return state;
}
}
Here is the complete code if you want to take a look! The app currently only supports moving the player in the dungeon by pressing arrow keys and the view is supposed to always be centeral based on the position of the player (player fails to move back when using time travel)
http://s.codepen.io/sabahang/debug/GjrPNQ
PS: Dungeon.generate does use Math.Random but I'm only using this function in initialState and for dispatched actions I'm only making a shallow copy of the generated map by sending the current state to Dungeon constructor and use its other methods (eg. movePlayer)
Found the culprit. It's not Redux's fault at all, it's about the way React works! If you are new to React and you haven't fallen into this trap yet wait for it!
It has to do with the fact that most of the conventional ways of copying a deeply nested object which is needed in Redux to implement a pure Reducer is in fact making a shallow copy of the objects and properties' memory references are still pointing to the original State. React updates the UI based on a deep comparison of the old state and the new one and when some of the references are the same it fails to update the UI properly. Here I have a 2 dimensional array map[][] which is an object and although I'm using ES6 spread operator to avoid modifying the original state because a shadow copy is being made, deeply nested indexes of the original map[][] are being modified. One solution would be to use `Array.map()' to create a completely new object but I ended up using immutablejs and it fixed my problem with the time travel slider.
This is a highly recommended reference if you don't want to spend weeks chasing similar bugs in complicated apps: http://redux.js.org/docs/recipes/reducers/ImmutableUpdatePatterns.html
and there are tons of immutability helpers to help based on your specific need:
https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem-links/blob/master/immutable-data.md#immutable-update-utilities
This one also looks interesting for Redux only:
https://github.com/indexiatech/redux-immutablejs
This question is potentially a duplicate of the following:
React-redux store updates but React does not