The kinda the same problem as described here
How to compare oldValues and newValues on React Hooks useEffect?
But in my case, usePrevious hook does not help.
Imagine the form with several inputs, selects, and so on. You may want to look at https://app.uniswap.org/#/swap to make a similar visualization. There are several actions and data updates that will be happened on almost any change, which will lead to several re-renders, at least 4. For example.
I have 2 inputs, each represents a token. Base(first one) and Quote(second one).
This is a state for Base
const [base, setBase] = useState({
balance: undefined,
price: undefined,
value: initState?.base?.value,
token: initState?.base?.token,
tokenId: initState?.base?.tokenId,
});
and for Quote
const [quote, setQuote] = useState({
balance: undefined,
price: undefined,
value: initState?.quote?.value,
token: initState?.quote?.token,
tokenId: initState?.quote?.tokenId,
});
They gonna form a pair, like BTC/USD for example.
By changing token (instead of BTC I will choose ETH) in the select menu I will trigger several actions: fetching wallet balance, fetching price, and there are gonna be a few more rerenders with input view update and modal window close. So at least 4 of them are happening right now. I want to be able to compare base.token and basePrv with
const basePrv = usePrevious(base?.token); but on the second re-render base.token and basePrv gonna have the same token property already and it is an issue.
I also have the swap functionality between the inputs where I should change base with quote and quote with base like that
setBase(prevState => ({
...prevState,
base: quote
}));
setQuote(prevState => ({
...prevState,
quote: base
}));
In that case, there are no additional requests that should be triggered.
Right now I have useEffect with token dependency on it. But it will be fired each time when the token gonna be changed which will lead to additional asynchronous calls and 'tail' of requests if you gonna click fast. That's why I need to compare the token property that was before the change to understand should I make additional calls and requests because of the formation of new pair (BTC/USD becomes ETH/USD) or I should ignore that because it was just a "swap" (BTC/USD becomes USD/BTC) and there is no need to make additional calls and fetches. I just had to, well, swap them, not more.
So in my story, usePrevious hook will return the previous token property only once, and at the second and third time, it would be overwritten by multiple re-renders(other properties would be fetched) to the new one. So at the time when useEffect gonna be triggered, I would have no chance to compare the previous token property and the current one, because they will show the same.
I have several thoughts on how to solve it, but I am not sure is it right or wrong, because it seemed to me that the decisions look more imperative than declarative.
I can leave everything as it is (requests would be triggered always on any change no matter what it was. Was it a swap or user changed a pair). I can disable the swap button until all of the requests would be finished. It would solve the problem with requests 'tail'. But it is a kinda hotfix, that gonna be work, but I do not like it, because it would lead to additional unnecessary requests and it would be slow and bad for UX.
I can use a state to keep the previous pair on it right before the update by setBase or setQuote happens. It will allow me to use useEffect and compare previous pair to the current one to understand did the pair was changed, or just swapped and take the decision should I make fetches and calls or not.
I can get rid of useEffect with base.token and quote.token dependencies and handle everything inside of onClick handler. Because of that, the swap functionality would not trigger useEffect, and calls and fetches would be fired only if the user gonna click and choose something different. But as I said this option seemed a little bit odd to me.
I tried to use closure here, to "remember" the previous state of tokens, but it is kinda similar to use the current component state. Also, you have to initialize closure outside of the functional component body, and I do not see a possibility to transfer the init state into it that way, so the code becomes more spaghettified.
So any other ideas guys? I definitely missing something. Maybe that much of re-renders is an antipattern but I am not sure how to avoid that.
There could be multiple solutions to your problem. I would suggest to pick one which is easier to understand.
1. Modify the usePrevious hook
You can modify the usePrevious hook to survive multiple renders.
Tip: use JSON.stringify to compare if you think the value will be a complex object and might change the reference even for same real value.
function usePrevious(value) {
const prevRef = useRef();
const curRef = useRef();
if (value !== curRef.current){
// or, use
// if ( JSON.stringify(value) !== JSON.stringify(curRef.current)){
prevRef.current = curRef.current;
curRef.current = value;
}
return prevRef.current;
}
2. Sort useEffect dependency array
Since you're using tokens(strings) as dependency array of useEffect, and you don't mind their order (swap shouldn't change anything), sort the dependency array like
useEffect(
() => {
// do some effect
},
[base.token, quote.token].sort()
)
3. Store the currently fetched tokens.
While storing the API response data, also store the tokens(part of request) associated with that data. Now, you'll have 2 sets of tokens.
currently selected tokens
currently fetched tokens
You can chose to fetch only when the currently fetched tokens don't fulfil your needs. You can also extend this and store previous API request/responses and pick the result from them if possible.
Verdict
Out of all these, 3rd seems a nice & more standardised approach to me, but an overkill for your need (unless you want to cache previous results).
I would have gone with 2nd because of simplicity and minimalism. However, It still depends on what you find easier at the end.
Related
I'm trying to arrange the data gotten from firebase but after I arrange it the app becomes slow and if I click on a button it gives an error saying "Excessive number of pending callbacks".
useEffect(() => {
if (chats.length && users.length) {
const list = [];
chats.forEach((chat) => {
if (chat.members.includes(userId)) {
chat.members.forEach((y) => {
if (y !== userId) {
console.log("receiver: " + y);
users.forEach((z) => {
if (z.id === y) {
console.log(z);
list.push({
chat: chat,
acc: z,
user: user
});
}
});
console.log(list);
}
});
}
});
setUserChats(list);
}
}, [chats, users]);
users and chats are both states that I got from firebase on snapshot also in useEffect
One guess: Your dependencies don't work in the way you expect them to. chats and users aren't primitives, so depending on how they get created and passed, it's possible useEffect is run on every render, no matter whether chat and users have changed in structure or not. So this is what might happen:
useEffect() will be called on every rerender due to your invalid dependencies.
useEffect() calls setUserChats() on every turn. In theory, setUserChats() will check whether the new state actually differs, but in the same manner as useEffect it "fails" in the comparison and takes every list as a new state.
setState() will trigger a new render. Rinse, repeat with 1)
What you need to understand it that useEffect checks whether dependencies have changed (and setUserChats() does so as well to decide whether new state actually differs from the old one). This check relies on the identity/equal reference, i.e. on oldValue === newValue. For non-primitive values that means: it doesn't matter if oldValue and newValue look alike or are perfect clones even - if they don't share the same address in the memory, they are taken as non-equal.
Check out this thread or this library for solutions. In your case, a simple (but not really nice) solution would be to change your dependencies to [JSON.stringify(chats), JSON.stringify(users)], but there are more elaborate, performant and reliable solutions out there.
(Additionally, you forget to add userId to the dependencies. So something like [userId, JSON.stringify(chats), JSON.stringify(users)] might be more appropriate.)
Another thought though: I don't see why all that logic requires to be put into a useEffect() anyway. Just calculate the list in the component itself and call setUserChats(list). Or does it take too long?
I am new to RxJs in general but am investigating a bug in some React code in which, upon an unrelated action, an old event seems to be emitted and rendered to a display error. Think if you had two buttons that generated two messages somewhere on screen, and clicking one button was showing the message for the other button.
Being new to RxJs I'm not positive where the problem lays. I don't see a single ReplaySubject in the code, only Obserables, Subjects, and BehaviourSubjects. So this is either misuse of an RxJs feature or just some bad logic somewhere.
Anyway I found the code with the related Observable and I'm not quite sure what this person was trying to accomplish here. I have read up on combineLatest, map, and pipe, but this looks like pointless code to me. Could it also be somehow re-emitting old events? I don't see dynamic subscriptions anywhere, especially in this case.
Tldr I don't understand the intent of this code.
export interface IFeedback {
id: number
text: string
}
export interface IFeedbackMessages {
message: IFeedback | undefined
}
feedback$ = new BehaviorSubject<IFeedback | undefined>(undefined)
feedbackNotifs$: Observable<IFeedbackMessages> = combineLatest([
feedback$
]).pipe(
map(([feedback]) => ({
feedback
})
))
I also found this which maybe be an issue. In the React component that displays this message, am I wrong but does it look like each time this thing renders it subscribes and then unsubscribes to the above Subject?
const FeedbackDisplay: React.FC () => {
const [feedbackNotifications, setFeedbackNotifications] = React.useState<IFeedbackMessages>()
React.useEffect(() =>
{
const sub = notification$.subscribe(setFeedbackNotifications)
return () => sub?.unsubscribe()
}, [notifications$])
}
Could it also be somehow re-emitting old events?
Yes, it probably is. BehaviorSubject has the unique property of immediately emitting the last value pushed to it as soon as you subscribe to it.
It's great when you want to model some persistent state value, and it's not good for events whose actual moment of occurrence is key. It sounds like the feedback messages you're working with fall into the second category, in which case Subject is probably a better choice.
does it look like each time this thing renders it subscribes and then unsubscribes to the above Subject?
Not exactly. useEffect accepts a callback, and within that callback you can optionally return a "cleanup" function. React will hang onto that function until the effect is triggered again, then it calls it to clean things up (which in this case consists of closing out the subscription) to make room for the next effect.
So in this case, the unsubscribe will only happen when the component is rendered with a new value for notifications$. Also worth pointing out that notifications$ will only change if it's either passed as a prop or created within the component function. If it's defined outside the function (imported from another file for example), you don't need to (and in fact should not) put it into useEffect's dependency array.
I've just started using Recoil on a new project and I'm not sure if there is a better way to accomplish this.
My app is an interface to basically edit a JSON file containing an array of objects. It reads the file in, groups the objects based on a specific property into tabs, and then a user can navigate the tabs, see the few hundred values per tab, make changes and then save the changes.
I'm using recoil because it allows me to access the state of each input from anywhere in my app, which makes saving much easier - in theory...
In order to generate State for each object in the JSON file, I've created an component that returns null and I map over the initial array, create the component, which creates Recoil state using an AtomFamily, and then also saves the ID to another piece of Recoil state so I can keep a list of everything.
Question 1 Is these a better way to do this? The null component doesn't feel right, but storing the whole array in a single piece of state causes a re-render of everything on every keypress.
To Save the data, I have a button which calls a function. That function just needs to get the ID's, loop through them, get the state of each one, and push them into an Array. I've done this with a Selector too, but the issue is that I can't call getRecoilValue from a function because of the Rules of Hooks - but if I make the value available to the parent component, it again slows everything right down.
Question 2 I'm pretty sure I'm missing the right way to think about storing state and using hooks, but I haven't found any samples for this particular use case - needing to generate the state up front, and then accessing it all again on Save. Any guidance?
Question 1
Get accustomed to null-rendering components, you almost can't avoid them with Recoil and, more in general, this hooks-first React world 😉
About the useRecoilValue inside a function: you're right, you should leverage useRecoilCallback for that kind of task. With useRecoilCallback you have a central point where you can get and set whatever you want at once. Take a look at this working CodeSandbox where I tried to replicate (the most minimal way) your use-case. The SaveData component (a dedicated component is not necessary, you could just expose the Recoil callback without creating an ad-hoc component) is the following
const SaveData = () => {
const saveData = useRecoilCallback(({ snapshot }) => async () => {
const ids = await snapshot.getPromise(carIds);
for (const carId of ids) {
const car = await snapshot.getPromise(cars(carId));
const carIndex = db.findIndex(({ id }) => id === carId);
db[carIndex] = car;
}
console.log("Data saved, new `db` is");
console.log(JSON.stringify(db, null, 2));
});
return <button onClick={saveData}>Save data</button>;
};
as you can see:
it retrieves all the ids through const ids = await snapshot.getPromise(carIds);
it uses the ids to retrieve all the cars from the atom family const car = await snapshot.getPromise(cars(carId));
All of that in a central point, without hooks and without subscribing the component to atoms updates.
Question 2
There are a few approaches for your use case:
creating empty atoms when the app starts, updating them, and saving them in the end. It's what my CodeSandbox does
doing the same but initializing the atoms through RecoilRoot' initialState prop
being updated by Recoil about every atom change. This is possible with useRecoilTransactionObserver but please, note that it's currently marked as unstable. A new way to do the same will be available soon (I guess) but at the moment it's the only solution
The latter is the "smarter" approach but it really depends on your use case, it's up to you to think if you really want to update the JSON at every atom' update 😉
I hope it helps, let me know if I missed something 😊
Here's some sample code I've written that works fine:
useEffect(() => {
if (!rolesIsLoading && rolesStatus === 200) {
customer.roles = rolesData.roles;
}
}, [rolesIsLoading, rolesStatus]);
I'm getting this warning in the console:
React Hook useEffect has missing dependencies: 'customer.roles' and 'rolesData.roles'. Either include them or remove the dependency array react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
The thing is, the code works fine now and, in some cases, when I add such dependencies, as instructed, I end up with an endless loop or some other problem.
I'd appreciate any advice you might have as to how you resolved this when you've encountered a similar situation.
From React DOCS:
Conditionally firing an effect
The default behavior for effects is to fire the effect after every completed render. That way an effect is always recreated if one of its dependencies changes.
However, this may be overkill in some cases, like the subscription example from the previous section. We don’t need to create a new subscription on every update, only if the source props has changed.
To implement this, pass a second argument to useEffect that is the array of values that the effect depends on. Our updated example now looks like this:
useEffect(
() => {
const subscription = props.source.subscribe();
return () => {
subscription.unsubscribe();
};
},
[props.source],
);
So, from the exercpt above we see that the dependencies array serves the purpose to conditionally fire an effect.
That warning you're getting is because you're using some external (from the effect's perspective) variables in your effect function that you're not mentioning in the dependency array.
React is worried that you might be getting new values for those variables in future renders, and since your effect uses them, React "default intent" is to re-run that effect with the new variables values. So your effect would always be up to date.
So you need to think if you want to re-run your effect if/when those variables change in the future.
Basic recommendations:
Add them to the dependency array
If they never change, there will be no difference
If they change, add some conditionals to your effect to decide whether you should do something based on the new variables values or not
If they're changing only in reference, but not in value (like functions, arrays, objects, etc), you can use the useCallback or useRef hook to preserve the "reference" for those variables from the first render and not get new references on every render.
I have a problem and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who ever had it... Although I tried to find a solution, I didin't really find something that fits my purpose.
I won't post much code, since its not really a code problem, but more a logic problem.
Imagine I have the following hook:
useEffect(() => {
fetchFromApi(props.match.params.id);
}, [props.match.params.id]);
Imagine the result of fetchFromApi is displayed in a simple table in the UI.
Now lets say the user clicks on an entity in the navigation, so the ID prop in the browser URL changes and the effect triggers, leading to an API call. Lets say the call with this specific ID takes 5 seconds.
During this 5 seconds, the user again clicks on an element in the navigation, so the hook triggers again. This time, the API call only takes 0,1 seconds. The result is immediatly displayed.
But the first call is still running. Once its finished, it overwrites the current result, what leads to wrong data being displayed in the wrong navigation section.
Is there a easy way to solve this? I know I can't cancel promises by default, but I also know that there are ways to achieve it...
Also, it could be possible that fetchFromApi is not a single API call, but instead multiple calls to multiple endpoints, so the whole thing could become really tricky...
Thanks for any help.
The solution to this is extremely simple, you just have to determine whether the response that you got was from the latest API call or not and only then except it. You can do it by storing a triggerTime in ref. If the API call has been triggered another time, the ref will store a different value, however the closure variable will hold the same previously set value and it mean that another API call has been triggered after this and so we don't need to accept the current result.
const timer = useRef(null);
useEffect(() => {
fetchFromApi(props.match.params.id, timer);
}, [props.match.params.id]);
function fetchFromApi(id, timer) {
timer.current = Date.now();
const triggerTime = timer.current;
fetch('path').then(() => {
if(timer.current == triggerTime) {
// process result here
// accept response and update state
}
})
}
Other ways to handle such scenarios to the cancel the previously pending API requests. IF you use Axios it provides you with cancelToken that you can use, and similarly you can cancel XMLHttpRequests too.