Using React, when we render a list of items and then insert an item to that list, the newly inserted item does not trigger componentDidMount
class Item extends React.Component {
componentDidMount() {
console.log(this.props.i)
}
render() {
return (<div>something</div>)
}
}
class App extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props)
this.state = {items: []}
this.prependItem = this.prependItem.bind(this)
}
prependItem() {
this.setState(prevState => {
return {items: [0, ...prevState.items]}
})
}
render() {
const {items} = this.state
return (
<div className="App">
<button onClick={() => this.prependItem()}>+</button>
{items.map((item, index) => {
return (<Item key={index} i={index}/>)
})}
</div>
);
}
}
Using the above code, a natural expectation would be '0' whenever the button is clicked, but in truth the output is 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ...
Essentially, the newly inserted item is treated as if it is exactly the same object as the previous item with that index, which can be unintuitive at times.
I guess a more direct question may be, how would I prepend an item to a list properly so that the componentDidMount for the new item (not the rest) would be triggered?
Let's start with React's approach. It renders Virtual DOM and next compares it with real DOM to realize what element to update, what to delete and what to create.
React does not know your intention and to be stable/predictable it should be really straightforward. So React operates on 2 things: type(it's tag on browser level or component name in JSX) and key prop.
Once both match - component will be updated. If any differs - and no other matches - then it will be delete + create.
There is really complete article on reconciliation in ReactJS docs.
When you use key={index} and add element to the very beginning it ends up with updating all the elements except last one(since there was no component with such a key in DOM yet). And only last element is created while others are updated. Including that you've just inserted.
Also it should explain why use some random data for key is bad idea: you will never predict what component is updated or if random data is unique over the time all the component will be deleted and re-created on each render cycle. It'd be bottleneck for performance.
import React, { useState, useEffect } from "react";
import ReactDOM from "react-dom";
import "./styles.css";
function Item({ i }) {
const inintialI = useRef(i);
console.log(`rendered ${i}; initially it was ${initialI.current}`);
useEffect(() => {
console.log(`created for ${i}`);
return (() => {
console.log(`deleted for ${i}`);
})
}, []);
return <li>{i}</li>;
}
function App() {
const [items, addItems] = useState([]);
return (
<React.Fragment>
<button onClick={() => addItems(items => [items.length, ...items])}>
+
</button>
<ul>
{items.map((i, index) => (
<Item key={index} i={i} />
))}
</ul>
</React.Fragment>
);
}
const rootElement = document.getElementById("root");
ReactDOM.render(<App />, rootElement);
Here is short snippet(at codesandbox) that output in console when component is created and updated. So important things we are easier to ensure:
React.Component renders each time parent renders
with key={index} we will always re-created last item while we actually insert item into list at index #0.
all other items not only are re-rendered but actually are updated that is not good for perfomance
Related
Working on reactJS project, and I know we don't mutate the state (usually i don't but don't know the exact reason) so I just tried some wrong approach even its working correctly.
import logo from './logo.svg';
import './App.css';
import Test from './test';
import {Home, NotFoundComponent,Contact, Profile} from './test/home'
import {
BrowserRouter as Router,
Route,
Link
} from 'react-router-dom'
import React, {Component} from 'react';
class App extends Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
list: [42, 33, 68],
};
}
onUpdateItem = i => {
this.state.list[i]++;
this.setState({
list: this.state.list,
})
// this.setState(state => {
// const list = state.list.map((item, j) => {
// if (j === i) {
// return item + 1;
// } else {
// return item;
// }
// });
// return {
// list,
// };
// });
};
render() {
return (
<div>
<ul>
{this.state.list.map((item, index) => (
<li key={item}>
The person is {item} years old.
<button
type="button"
onClick={() => this.onUpdateItem(index)}
>
Make me one year older
</button>
</li>
))}
</ul>
</div>
);
}
}
export default App;
this.state.list[i]++;
this.setState({
list: this.state.list,
})
what is the problem with when I update the code above instead map method, both give the correct output?
explain to me this behind the scene
code sandbox link
Here is the reason:
When you mutate an array, say list[i]++ the identity of the array is not changed so listBefore ==== listAfter, while you map over the array listBefore !== listAfter, when you invoke setState, ALL the children component will be invoked again by default even if you put nothing inside setState. Because react can not tell if the children update is necessary by default and it is a waste of resources actually.
You can prevent this from happening by telling the Children "Do NOT update" by calling shouldComponentUpdate or simply use PureComponent.
And the way to tell if updates are necessary is to compare using ===
In addition, Even if you do not care about performance. you should never do this. It will cause some debuggable bugs in some cases mainly because the updates in react is NOT synchronized. I never encounter by the way because I do not even dare to try
When you update your state you should take care of immutable.
onUpdateItem = i => {
//this.state.list[i]++;
//this.setState({
// list: this.state.list,
//})
this.setState({
list: this.state.list.map((value,index)=>{
if(i === index) return value+1;
return value;
})
});
}
If you are not maintaining immutable, your app will not work what you expected.
React states are updated follow life-cycle.
if without immutability, it means you are breaking the life-cycle.
I am learning reactjs and I wrote component with the method componentWillReceiveProps (cWRP) but I read that it is deprecated and it must replace with getDerivedStateFromProps (gDSFP) - https://en.reactjs.org/blog/2018/06/07/you-probably-dont-need-derived-state.html.
Please note that the following code has the sole purpose of illustrating my problem and questions. It is not a full code.
App.js file :
import React from 'react';
import './App.css';
import Display from './component.js'
class App extends React.Component {
state={resetCounter:false}
resetCounter= () => this.setState( {resetCounter: true} );
render() {
return (
<div className="App">
<header className="App-header">
<Display resetCounter={this.state.resetCounter}></Display>
<div>
<p></p><p></p>
<button onClick={this.resetCounter}>Reset</button>
</div>
</header>
</div>
);
}
componentDidUpdate () {
if (this.state.resetCounter!==false)
this.setState( {resetCounter: false} );
}
}
export default App;
component.js file
import React from 'react'
class Display extends React.Component {
constructor() {
super();
this.state = this.resetState();
this.state.generalCounter=0;
}
/* method to avoid code duplication in constructor and cWRP
could not be used with getDerivedStateFromProps */
resetState = () => ({resettableCounter: 0,});
componentWillReceiveProps(nextProps) {
if (nextProps.resetCounter===true)
this.setState(this.resetState())
}
render() {
return (
<>
<div>
<div>general counter : {this.state.generalCounter}</div>
<div>resettable counter : {this.state.resettableCounter}</div>
</div>
<div>
<button onClick={this.incCounters}>+</button>
<button onClick={this.decCounters}>-</button>
</div>
</>
)
}
incCounters= () => this.setState(
{
resettableCounter: this.state.resettableCounter+1,
generalCounter: this.state.generalCounter+1
}
)
decCounters= () => this.setState(
{
resettableCounter: this.state.resettableCounter-1,
generalCounter: this.state.generalCounter-1
}
)
}
export default Display
In the state of the component, there is a resettable part and a non resettable one. A method resetState is used to avoid code duplication in the constructor and in cWRP.
To replace cWRP by gDSFP, I wrote a class method because instance method could NOT be called in gDSFP (this is not usable)
...
constructor() {
super();
this.state = Display.resetState();
this.state.generalCounter=0;
}
static resetState () {
return ({resettableCounter: 0,});
}
static getDerivedStateFromProps(nextProps) {
if (nextProps.resetCounter === true) {
return Display.resetState();
} else {
return null;
}
}
...
With this solution, it is very easy to modify all my components but I am not sure that it is a good mean.
I wonder if I have a misconception and if I should rewrite my components to separate them into Fully controlled components and Fully uncontrolled components with a key ( https://en.reactjs.org/blog/2018/06/07/you-probably-dont-need-derived-state.html#preferred-solutions).
For example, in this case, do I have to write :
One Fully uncontrolled components for the resettable counter
One Fully controlled one for the non resettable counter
A parent component with the +/- buttons to render them.
I ask this question because in some cases, it will be much work, so I want to be sure before continuing.
You would want to keep the gdsfp version in your post if your component depends on some outside props, which you don't have controll over (such as JSON returned or 3rd party render props component, etc).
It looks like you have a full control over what's passed down to the Display. You can pass down an initial resettableCounter value down to Display.
The advantage is two-folds.
Your Display props shows what the Display does - Making it more descriptivie/readable.
It's easier to maintain, as you don't have to massage the data.
For your particular case, Fully uncontrolled component with a key seems to make more sense, as Display should accept the initial value to show, but is responsible for managing the reseetableCounter.
Unless it's absolutely unavoidable, don't create components which control their siblings (or parents). Instead, lift state to a common ancestor:
const Display = ({
generalCounter,
resettableCounter,
incrementCounters,
decrementCounters,
}) => (
<div>
<div>General Counter: {generalCounter}</div>
<div>Resettable Counter: {resettableCounter}</div>
<button onClick={incrementCounters}>Increment</button>
<button onClick={decrementCounters}>Decrement</button>
</div>
);
class DisplayContainer extends React.Component {
state = {
generalCounter: 0,
resettableCounter: 0,
};
incrementCounters = () => this.setState(prevState => ({
generalCounter: prevState.generalCounter + 1,
resettableCounter: prevState.resettableCounter + 1,
}));
decrementCounters = () => this.setState(prevState => ({
generalCounter: prevState.generalCounter - 1,
resettableCounter: prevState.resettableCounter - 1,
}));
resetResettableCounter = () => this.setState({
resettableCounter: 0,
});
render() {
return (
<React.Fragment>
<Display
{...this.state}
incrementCounters={this.incrementCounters}
decrementCounters={this.decrementCounters}
/>
<button onClick={this.resetResettableCounter}>
Reset Resettable Counter
</button>
</React.Fragment>
);
}
}
const App = () => (
<div>
<DisplayContainer />
</div>
);
An alternative approach would be something like Redux (which effectively lifts state out of React).
We should avoid method binding inside render because during re-rendering it will create the new methods instead of using the old one, that will affect the performance.
So for the scenarios like this:
<input onChange = { this._handleChange.bind(this) } ...../>
We can bind _handleChange method either in constructor:
this._handleChange = this._handleChange.bind(this);
Or we can use property initializer syntax:
_handleChange = () => {....}
Now lets consider the case where we want to pass some extra parameter, lets say in a simple todo app, onclick of item i need to delete the item from array, for that i need to pass either the item index or the todo name in each onClick method:
todos.map(el => <div key={el} onClick={this._deleteTodo.bind(this, el)}> {el} </div>)
For now just assume that todo names are unique.
As per DOC:
The problem with this syntax is that a different callback is created
each time the component renders.
Question:
How to avoid this way of binding inside render method or what are the alternatives of this?
Kindly provide any reference or example, thanks.
First: A simple solution will be to create a component for the content inside a map function and pass the values as props and when you call the function from the child component you can pass the value to the function passed down as props.
Parent
deleteTodo = (val) => {
console.log(val)
}
todos.map(el =>
<MyComponent val={el} onClick={this.deleteTodo}/>
)
MyComponent
class MyComponent extends React.Component {
deleteTodo = () => {
this.props.onClick(this.props.val);
}
render() {
return <div onClick={this.deleteTodo}> {this.props.val} </div>
}
}
Sample snippet
class Parent extends React.Component {
_deleteTodo = (val) => {
console.log(val)
}
render() {
var todos = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
return (
<div>{todos.map(el =>
<MyComponent key={el} val={el} onClick={this._deleteTodo}/>
)}</div>
)
}
}
class MyComponent extends React.Component {
_deleteTodo = () => {
console.log('here'); this.props.onClick(this.props.val);
}
render() {
return <div onClick={this._deleteTodo}> {this.props.val} </div>
}
}
ReactDOM.render(<Parent/>, document.getElementById('app'));
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/15.1.0/react.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/15.1.0/react-dom.min.js"></script>
<div id="app"></div>
EDIT:
Second: The other approach to it would be to use memoize and return a function
constructor() {
super();
this._deleteTodoListener = _.memoize(
this._deleteTodo, (element) => {
return element.hashCode();
}
)
}
_deleteTodo = (element) => {
//delete handling here
}
and using it like
todos.map(el => <div key={el} onClick={this._deleteTodoListener(el)}> {el} </div>)
P.S. However this is not a best solution and will still result in
multiple functions being created but is still an improvement over the
initial case.
Third: However a more appropriate solution to this will be to add an attribute to the topmost div and get the value from event like
_deleteTodo = (e) => {
console.log(e.currentTarget.getAttribute('data-value'));
}
todos.map(el => <div key={el} data-value={el} onClick={this._deleteTodo}> {el} </div>)
However, in this case the attributes are converted to string using toString method and hence and object will be converted to [Object Object] and and array like ["1" , "2", "3"] as "1, 2, 3"
How to avoid this way of binding inside render method or what are the
alternatives of this?
If you care about re-rendering then shouldComponentUpdate and PureComponent are your friends and they will help you optimize rendering.
You have to extract "Child" component from the "Parent" and pass always the same props and implement shouldComponentUpdate or use PureComponent. What we want is a case when we remove a child, other children shouldn't be re-rendered.
Example
import React, { Component, PureComponent } from 'react';
import { render } from 'react-dom';
class Product extends PureComponent {
render() {
const { id, name, onDelete } = this.props;
console.log(`<Product id=${id} /> render()`);
return (
<li>
{id} - {name}
<button onClick={() => onDelete(id)}>Delete</button>
</li>
);
}
}
class App extends Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
products: [
{ id: 1, name: 'Foo' },
{ id: 2, name: 'Bar' },
],
};
this.handleDelete = this.handleDelete.bind(this);
}
handleDelete(productId) {
this.setState(prevState => ({
products: prevState.products.filter(product => product.id !== productId),
}));
}
render() {
console.log(`<App /> render()`);
return (
<div>
<h1>Products</h1>
<ul>
{
this.state.products.map(product => (
<Product
key={product.id}
onDelete={this.handleDelete}
{...product}
/>
))
}
</ul>
</div>
);
}
}
render(<App />, document.getElementById('root'));
Demo: https://codesandbox.io/s/99nZGlyZ
Expected behaviour
<App /> render()
<Product id=1... render()
<Product id=2... render()
When we remove <Product id=2 ... only <App /> is re-rendered.
render()
To see those messages in demo, open the dev tools console.
The same technique is used and described in article: React is Slow, React is Fast: Optimizing React Apps in Practice by François Zaninotto.
Documentation encourages to use data-attributes and access them from within evt.target.dataset:
_deleteTodo = (evt) => {
const elementToDelete = evt.target.dataset.el;
this.setState(prevState => ({
todos: prevState.todos.filter(el => el !== elementToDelete)
}))
}
// and from render:
todos.map(
el => <div key={el} data-el={el} onClick={this._deleteTodo}> {el} </div>
)
Also note that this makes sense only when you have performance issues:
Is it OK to use arrow functions in render methods?
Generally speaking, yes, it is OK, and it is often the easiest way to
pass parameters to callback functions.
If you do have performance issues, by all means, optimize!
This answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/45053753/2808062 is definitely exhaustive, but I'd say fighting excessive re-renders instead of just re-creating the tiny callback would bring you more performance improvements. That's normally achieved by implementing a proper shouldComponentUpdate in the child component.
Even if the props are exactly the same, the following code will still re-render children unless they prevent it in their own shouldComponentUpdate (they might inherit it from PureComponent):
handleChildClick = itemId => {}
render() {
return this.props.array.map(itemData => <Child onClick={this.handleChildClick} data={itemData})
}
Proof: https://jsfiddle.net/69z2wepo/92281/.
So, in order to avoid re-renders, the child component has to implement shouldComponentUpdate anyway. Now, the only reasonable implementation is completely ignoring onClick regardless of whether it has changed:
shouldComponentUpdate(nextProps) {
return this.props.array !== nextProps.array;
}
Let's take some trivial react component that have to render:
1) text field (managed one, connected to state)
2) list of tasks (map through array connected to state too)
3) button, that adds new item to array from text field, when clicked
https://stackblitz.com/edit/react-glpzqn?embed=1&file=index.js
when text field is updated(textChange event) => then state is updated => that force render(on each key press in text field).
it's unwanted render, I only want to render when button is clicked, item is added to array and finally new list is rendered on a screen.
so I want to force render only on item added to the list, and not when text is changed.
some solutions that I can reveal are:
1) take input to another component so text change will not affect list rendering.
2) change input field to unmanaged and retrieve text manually when button clicked.
I'm guessing if there is some more elegant solution without changing a component?
may be by using some HOC or same?
The simplest solution is using shouldComponentUpdate. Not on the entire component, but on the components you want not to render if props not relevant to them are changing:
class List extends Component {
shouldComponentUpdate(nextProps) {
return nextProps.items !== this.props.items
}
render() {
// will only fire when the tasks array has changed
console.log('list rendered')
return this.props.items.map(item => (
<div key={item}>{item}</div>
))
}
}
This is just a shallow check too, which you get for free with PureComponent
class List extends PureComponent {
render() {
return this.props.items.map(item => (
<div key={item}>{item}</div>
))
}
}
All together:
import React, { Component, PureComponent } from 'react';
import { render } from 'react-dom';
class List extends PureComponent {
render() {
console.log('list rendered')
return this.props.items.map(item => (
<div key={item}>{item}</div>
))
}
}
class App extends Component {
// do not need constructor if already using class arrows
state = {
input: "",
tasks: []
};
addTask = () => {
this.setState({
tasks: [...this.state.tasks, this.state.input],
input: ""
});
}
setValue = event => {
this.setState({
input: event.target.value
});
}
render() {
return (
<div>
<List items={this.state.tasks} />
<input onChange={this.setValue} value={this.state.input} />
<button onClick={this.addTask}>Add</button>
</div>
);
}
}
render(<App />, document.getElementById('root'));
stackblitz solution
Just replace onChange with onBlur like below, the below change would only render as soon you leave the input.
<input onBlur={this.setValue} />
I have an array of strings which I would like to render as a list, with a colored text. The user can change the color with a button.
For that I have built a component called which receives an array and renders a list with the array's values and a button to change the color:
import React, { Component } from "react";
const renderArray = arr => (arr.map(value => (
<li>
{value}
</li>
)))
class List extends Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
color: 'red'
}
}
toggleColor = () => {
if (this.state.color === "red") {
this.setState({color: "blue"});
} else {
this.setState({color: "red"});
}
}
render() {
const style = {
color: this.state.color
};
return (
<div style={style}>
<ul>
{renderArray(this.props.array)}
</ul>
<button onClick={this.toggleColor}>Change color</button>
</div>
);
}
}
export default List;
The List is called with:
<List array={arr} />
And arr:
const arr = ['one', 'two', 'three'];
Fiddle here: Fiddle
But this seems incorrect to me. I rerender the whole array by calling renderArray() each time the color changes. In this case it is not too bad but what if the renderArray() is much more complex?
To my understanding, I need to create a new list only if the array prop changes and this could do in getDerivedStateFromProps (or in componentWillReceiveProps which will be deprecated...):
componentWillReceiveProps(nextProps)
{
const renderedArray = renderArray(nextProps.array);
this.setState({ renderedArray });
}
And then, on render, use this.state.renderedArray to show the list.
But this seems strange, to store a rendered object in the state...
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
1) React uses the concept of virtual DOM to calculate the actual difference in memory and only if it exists, render the difference into DOM
2) You can "help" React by providing a "key", so react will better understand if it's needed to re-render list/item or not
3) Your code componentWillReceiveProps can be considered as a bad practice because you're trying to make a premature optimization. Is repaint slow? Did you measure it?
4) IMHO: renderArray method doesn't make sense and can be inlined into List component
React render the DOM elements efficiently by using a virtual DOM and checks if the update needs to happen or not and hence, it may not be an issue even if you render the list using props. To optimise on it, what you can do is to make use of PureComponent which does a shallow comparison of state and props and doesn't cause a re-render if nothing has changed
import Reactfrom "react";
const renderArray = arr => (arr.map(value => (
<li>
{value}
</li>
)))
class List extends React.PureComponent { // PureComponent
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
color: 'red'
}
}
toggleColor = () => {
if (this.state.color === "red") {
this.setState({color: "blue"});
} else {
this.setState({color: "red"});
}
}
render() {
const style = {
color: this.state.color
};
return (
<div style={style}>
<ul>
{renderArray(this.props.array)}
</ul>
<button onClick={this.toggleColor}>Change color</button>
</div>
);
}
}
export default List;