What's the idea behind defining the setState values inside useEffect's dependency array?
const [someState, setSomeState] = useState();
...
useEffect(() => {
// Do something
setSomeState('some value');
}, [setSomeState]);
React Hook useEffect has a missing dependency: 'setSomeState'.
Either include it or remove the dependency array.
eslint(react-hooks/exhaustive-deps)
Not exactly sure if this example would cause eslint to ask to define setSomeState in the dependency array, but I have seen this kind of moments when writing with useEffect. What is React listening to in this case? My understanding is that useEffect listens for changes in the values in the dependency array, but would setSomeState ever change? What am I missing here?
In this case, no, the useState setter function will never change, but useEffect doesn't know it is a function from another hook, it just sees a function.
Consider this use case:
const MyComponent = ({ onUpdate }) => {
const [state, setState] = useState();
useEffect(() => {
// state updated, call onUpdate callback with state
onUpdate(state);
}, [onUpdate, state]);
return ...
}
Now parent component can, given
<MyComponent onUpdate={onUpdateHandler} />
define onUpdateHandler as
let onUpdateHandler = console.log;
then later change it while still mounted
onUpdateHandler = state => dispatch({ type: 'SAVE_STATE', state });
By placing the callback in the dependency array the effect hook see the value of onUpdate changed and trigger the effect again. If it didn't include the callback then it would continue to console.log state updates instead of now handling it differently.
It is more likely for values to change than it is for functions to change, but function values can change. You likely have an eslinter that is recommending you add all the variables used within the hook to the dependency array, and this will in most cases be the correct thing to do. A few exceptions are for example, when you want an effect to compute ONLY when the component mounts by specifying an empty array, or not including some variables that are functions that you KNOW will never change during the life of the component, and in these cases you can use the eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps override to unflag it as a warning. Caution though, as this will disable the linting checks so it is possible for bugs to creep in if not paying attention.
Related
Considering an useEffect with 2 different states in the dependency array. The useEffect hook will run whenever any of those two states are updated, but if i update one of them, will i have access to the lastest value of the other inside useEffect? And if not, what is the best approach to it?
function Component() {
const [state1, setState1] = useState('');
const [state2, setState2] = useState('');
useEffect(() => {
console.log(state1, state2)
}, [state1, state2]);
return <>...</>
}
The callback inside useEffect will run after the render conditionally based on dependency array.
If your state values are updated in the same render cycle then they are batched (by React) and the next render cycle will show both the correct values in the useEffect callback.
If you only update any one of them, you do not have to worry about the other value because the callback in useEffect will be using the recently updated value of the other variable too.
Note: The only time you might face an issue is when you have stale state values because of closure, but that is a specific case.
I have a function below which i used as an array dependency to a useEffect handler
const handleInputUpdate = (event) => {
const eventValue = event.target.value;
setState({ ...state, answer_text: eventValue, trigger: true })
// console.log("I am changing for no reason")
}
Below is the useEffect handler
useEffect(() => console.log(" I am changing for no reason in useeffect"), [handleInputUpdate])
What i want is the useEffect handler to run only when the handleInputUpdate function is called but it runs also on component mount.
Here's what i've observed
The handleInputUpdate function doesn't run on component mount but only i need it to
Without respect to the above observation, the useEffect handler runs anyway.
Here's what i've tried
I tried consoling a text inside the handleInputUpdate function to see whether it runs on component render but it doesn't.
Even though the function doesn't run, the useEffect handler triggers anyway which is not what i want.
How can i solve this ?
Thanks in advance
useEffect dependency array is not used to trigger the effect when a function is called; the elements of the array are observed for any change and then trigger the effect.
In this case, handleInputUpdate will change on every render because it is not memoised, so the effect will also run on every render.
Since handleInputUpdate changes the state when it is called, you are better off adding that state to your useEffect dependency array:
useEffect(() => {
if (answer_text && trigger) {
console.log("I am changing for a reason in useeffect")
}
}, [answer_text, trigger])
The handleInputUpdate function, while it doesn't run on render, looks like it's created when the component runs, just before rendering. Since it won't be === to the value last in the dependency array - the handleInputUpdate from the prior render - the effect callback will run.
You need to observe changes to the answer_text value in state instead.
useEffect(() => {
// ...
}, [state.answer_text]);
I would also recommend separating out your state into different variables - these aren't class components, don't feel like you have to mash everything together into a single object structure.
const [text, setText] = useState('');
I am currently trying to learn about the inner workings of React in context of when a component is re-rendered or especially when (callback-)functions are recreated.
In doing so, I have come across a phenomenon which I just cannot get my head around. It (only) happens when having a state comprising an array. Here is a minimal code that shows the "problem":
import { useEffect, useState } from "react";
export function Child({ value, onChange }) {
const [internalValue, setInternalValue] = useState(value);
// ... stuff interacting with internalValue
useEffect(() => {
onChange(internalValue);
}, [onChange, internalValue]);
return <div>{value}</div>;
}
export default function App() {
const [state, setState] = useState([9.0]);
return <Child value={state[0]} onChange={(v) => setState([v])} />;
}
The example comprises a Parent (App) Component with a state, being an array of a single number, which is given to the Child component. The Child may do some inner workings and set the internal state with setInternalValue, which in turn will trigger the effect. This effect will raise the onChange function, updating a value of the state array of the parent. (Note that this example is minimized to show the effect. The array would have multiple values, where for each a Child component is shown) However this example results in an endless re-rendering of the Child with the following console warning being raised throughout:
Warning: Maximum update depth exceeded. This can happen when a component calls setState inside useEffect, but useEffect either doesn't have a dependency array, or one of the dependencies changes on every render.
Debugging shows, that the re-rendering occurs due to onChange being changed. However, I do not understand this. Why is onChange being changed? Neither internalState nor state is changed anywhere.
There are two workarounds I found:
Remove onChange from the dependencies of the effect in the Child. This "solves" the re-rendering and would be absolutely acceptable for my use case. However, it is bad practice as far as I know, since onChange is used inside the effect. Also, ESLint is indicating this as a warning.
Using a "raw" number in the state, instead of an array. This will also get rid of the re-rendering. However this is only acceptable in this minimal example, as there is only one number used. For a dynamic count of numbers, this workaround is not viable.
useCallback is also not helping and just "bubbling up" the re-recreation of the onChange function.
So my question is: Do React state (comprising arrays) updates are being handled differently and is omitting a dependency valid here? What is the correct way to do this?
Why is onChange being changed?
On every render, you create a new anonymous function (v) => setState([v]).
Since React makes a shallow comparison with the previous props before rendering, it always results in a render, since in Javascript:
const y = () => {}
const x = () => {}
x !== y // always true
// In your case
const onChangeFromPreviousRender = (v) => setState([v])
const onChangeInCurrentRender = (v) => setState([v])
onChangeFromPreviousRender !== onChangeInCurrentRender
What is the correct way to do this?
There are two ways to correct it, since setState is guaranteed to be stable, you can just pass the setter and use your logic in the component itself:
// state[0] is primitive
// setState stable
<Child value={state[0]} onChange={setState} />
useEffect(() => {
// set as array
onChange([internalValue]);
}, [onChange, internalValue]);
Or, Memoizing the function will guarantee the same identity.
const onChange = useCallback(v => setState([v]), []);
Notice that we memoize the function only because of its nontrivial use case (beware of premature optimization).
I am trying to use an async function inside a useEffect callback.
There is a behavior i don't understand (in my case related to the throttle function from lodash).
I don't get what is happing, and how to solve it, here is a sample of the code:
import throttle from 'lodash/throttle';
const myRequestWrapped = throttle(myRequest, 300);
const [name, setName] = useState('');
useEffect(() => {
myRequest(name) // No warning
myRequestWrapped(name); // React Hook useEffect has a missing dependency: 'myRequestWrapped'. Either include it or remove the dependency array
}, [ name ]);
If i add myRequestWrapped as a dependency, i have an infinite loop (the effect is triggered continuously).
I guess the throttle method works with a timer and it returns a different result at every run so i can understand why the infinite loop.
But i really don't understand why React wants it as a dependency (especially that it works without adding it !).
What is the logic?
Why myRequestWrapped and not myRequest?
Should i ignore the warning or do you know a clean way to solve that?
Thanks.
Its not React that wants you to add myRequestWrapped as a dependency but its eslint.
Also you must note that ESLint isn't aware of the programmers intention so it just warns the user if there is a scope of error being made.
Hooks heavily rely on closures and sometimes its difficult to figure out bugs related to closures and that is why eslint prompts if there is a case of a fucntion of variabled used within useEffect that might reflect the updated values.
Of course the check isn't perfect and you could carefully decide whether you need to add a dependency to useEffect or not.
If you see that what you wrote is perfectly correct. You can disable the warning
useEffect(() => {
myRequest(name);
myRequestWrapped(name);
// eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
}, [ name ]);
Also you must not that throttle function cannot be used within render of functional componentDirectly as it won't be effective if it sets state as the reference of it will change
The solution here is to use useCallback hook. Post that even if you add myRequestWrapped as a dependency to useEffect you won't be seeing an infinite loop since the function will only be created once as useCallback will memoize and return the same reference of the function on each render.
But again you must be careful about adding dependency to useCallback
import throttle from 'lodash/throttle';
const Comp = () => {
const myRequestWrapped = useCallback(throttle(myRequest, 300), []);
const [name, setName] = useState('');
useEffect(() => {
myRequest(name);
myRequestWrapped(name);
}, [ name ]);
...
}
Shubham is right: it's not REACT, but ESLint instead (or TSLint, depending on the Linter you are using).
If I may add, the reason why the Linter suggest you to add myRequestWrapped is because of how the closures work in JavaScript.
To let you understand, take this easier example (and I need this because I would need to know what it's inside myRequestWrapped:
const MyComp = props => {
const [count, setCount] = React.useState(0);
const handleEvent = (e) => {
console.log(count);
}
React.useEffect(() => {
document.body.addEventListener('click', handleEvent);
return () => { document.body.removeEventListener('click', handleEvent); }
}, []);
return <button onClick={e => setCount(s => s +1)}>Click me</button>
}
So, right now, when MyComp is mounted, the event listener is added to the document.body, and anytime the click event is triggered, you call handleEvent, which will log count.
But, since the event listener is added when the component is mounted, the variable count inside handleEvent is, and always will be, equal to 0: that is because the instance of handleEvent created when you added the event listener is just one, the one that you associated with the event listener.
Instead, if you would write the useEffect like this:
React.useEffect(() => {
document.body.addEventListener('click', handleEvent);
return () => { document.body.removeEventListener('click', handleEvent); }
}, [handleEevent]);
Anytime the handleEvent method is updated, also your event listener is updated with the one handleEvent, thus when clicking on the document.body you will always log the latest count value.
I have a component that looks like this:
const MyComponent = props => {
const { checked, onChange, id } = props;
const [isChecked, setChecked] = useState(false);
useEffect(() => {
onChange && onChange({ isChecked: !!checked, id });
setChecked(checked);
}, [checked]);
const childProps = {
id,
isChecked
};
return <ChildComponent {...childProps} />;
};
The exhaustive-deps lint rule isn't happy:
React Hook useEffect has missing dependencies: id and onChange.
Either include them or remove the dependency array.
(react-hooks/exhaustive-deps)eslint
I know that id and onChange are not going to change, so adding them to the dependency array seems unnecessary. But the rule isn't a warning, it's a clear instruction to do something.
Is the ESLint rule:
1) Over-cautious and a bit dumb in this instance, so safe to ignore?
2) Highlighting best practice - i.e. to minimise unexpected bugs that might occur in future if, for instance, changes in parent components mean that id will change at some point in future?
3) Showing an actual/possible problem with the code as it currently is?
Old Answer
Actually the rule is very straightforward: Either pass an array containing all dependencies, or don't pass anything. So I guess the rule isn't dumb, it just doesn't know if the dependencies are going to change or not. So yes, if you are passing an array of dependencies it should contain ALL dependencies, including those you know for a fact that will not change. Something like this will throw a warning:
useEffect(() => dispatch({ someAction }), [])
And to fix this you should pass dispatch as a dependency, even though it will never change:
useEffect(() => dispatch({ someAction }), [dispatch])
Don't disable the exhaustive deps rule, as mentioned here
UPDATE 05/04/2021
As addressed here. This is no longer necessary since eslint pull #1950.
Now referential types with stable signature such as those provenients from useState or useDispatch can safely be used inside an effect without triggering exhaustive-deps even when coming from props
The way to look at it is every render has its own effect. If the effect will be the same with a particular set of values, then we can tell React about those values in the dependencies array. Ideally, a component with the same state and props, will always have the same output (rendered component + effect) after its render and effect is done. This is what makes it more resilient to bugs.
The point of the rule is that, if the deps DO change, the effect SHOULD run again, because it is now a different effect.
These 3 links also give more insights about this:
https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/14920#issuecomment-471070149
https://overreacted.io/a-complete-guide-to-useeffect/
https://overreacted.io/writing-resilient-components/